5 ms·

'Entertainment' can paint any kind of picture, true or not. There's a huge cost when a consumer discovers she's been duped. Take, for example, http://www.ethicu

'Entertainment' can paint any kind of picture, true or not. There's a huge cost when a consumer discovers she's been duped. Take, for example, http://www.ethicurean.com/2006/05/18/judys-eggs/ http://www.ethicurean.com/2006/05/18/judys-eggs/ Here's a company, pushing a brand that's supposedly some little, old Judy who's just figuring out this web stuff and doesn't have time to reply to all her email... BULLSHIT. It's Petaluma Farms, one of the biggest egg producers in California. The cost of this 'entertainment' affects all producers who honestly portray their products and story. Their messages are discounted and diluted by this bs. I've spoken with a grocer in the SF Bay area who say most producers are "liars and full of it" because of this kind of advertising. That's what this really is, bs advertising and it doesn't help anyone. For honest businesses, properly portraying their operations, let's call it what it is... Transparent Capitalism maybe?

grandalf 16y ago
True... but the question is, does it get less entertaining if it's not true? For most people it doesn't... Mackey himself invoked the quote "The perfect is the enemy of the good" in response to this question... So, if you fill up your cart at Whole Foods you may not be 100% cruelty free and 100% organic.. maybe you're 40% cruelty free and 30% organic.... the question is, is it worth it to you? Maybe someone will be able to create a profitable business by making a real promise in the marketing about what kind of food is being sold... But until society is ready for it, it won't be a profitable business. For now people prefer the feel good approach of making a minor difference and signaling it strongly... Just look around at all the Priuses for an example of this phenomenon in action. Anyway... the perfect is the enemy of the good...
- Psyonic 16y ago
  I'm not claiming that he's necessarily right, but Slavoj Zizek claims that so-called "consumer capitalism" actually does more harm than good. He says the fiction makes people feel good and complacent, and actually serves to prevent the frustration that leads to real change. I can't find a link, atm, but if I do I'll update the post.
  - grandalf 16y ago
    I think that's a valid point, but couldn't you argue that any social movement may be imperfect and may actually serve to prevent "real change". After all, social entrepreneurs (revolutionaries, thought leaders) often profit from the existence of the problem they are trying to solve.
    - Psyonic 16y ago
      You probably could. I think perhaps whats different here is that the eco-movement is asking people to do things that make almost 0 difference in reality (taking a shorter shower, remembering to bring your green bag to take home groceries in), but still make them feel like they've made an effort. Perhaps we should only ask people to make changes for things that will make a significant difference, otherwise we risk squandering their will to change on basically pointless actions. Then again, you could argue that getting people involved at all may lead to better things. Political campaigns use this principle; first they just try and get a sign on your yard. If you'll do that, then they ask for you to talk to your friends, call people, etc. Baby steps. I'm not sure I'm convinced either way, but it's interesting to think about.
      - grandalf 16y ago
        That's a very good point. Considering the sorts of things that people are able to ignore (while paying attention to other, highly insignificant things) I think it's mostly about what feels good to the people doing it. In a world in which seeming "socially responsible" and "environmentally responsible" is a status signal, people will do small things to give off that signal.... while ignoring all sorts of other areas in which the slightest awareness or outrage would lead to immediate change.
        zackattack 16y ago
        I've enjoyed reading this discussion. Psyonic - I'm helping make http://www.idrumskins.com/CPIT001/index.html http://www.idrumskins.com/CPIT001/index.html ... would you like to contribute? grandalf - I'm curious, what do you do professionally? -Zack zackster@gmail.com

grandalf 16y ago

True... but the question is, does it get less entertaining if it's not true? For most people it doesn't... Mackey himself invoked the quote "The perfect is the enemy of the good" in response to this question... So, if you fill up your cart at Whole Foods you may not be 100% cruelty free and 100% organic.. maybe you're 40% cruelty free and 30% organic.... the question is, is it worth it to you? Maybe someone will be able to create a profitable business by making a real promise in the marketing about what kind of food is being sold... But until society is ready for it, it won't be a profitable business. For now people prefer the feel good approach of making a minor difference and signaling it strongly... Just look around at all the Priuses for an example of this phenomenon in action. Anyway... the perfect is the enemy of the good...

Psyonic 16y ago
I'm not claiming that he's necessarily right, but Slavoj Zizek claims that so-called "consumer capitalism" actually does more harm than good. He says the fiction makes people feel good and complacent, and actually serves to prevent the frustration that leads to real change. I can't find a link, atm, but if I do I'll update the post.
- grandalf 16y ago
  I think that's a valid point, but couldn't you argue that any social movement may be imperfect and may actually serve to prevent "real change". After all, social entrepreneurs (revolutionaries, thought leaders) often profit from the existence of the problem they are trying to solve.
  - Psyonic 16y ago
    You probably could. I think perhaps whats different here is that the eco-movement is asking people to do things that make almost 0 difference in reality (taking a shorter shower, remembering to bring your green bag to take home groceries in), but still make them feel like they've made an effort. Perhaps we should only ask people to make changes for things that will make a significant difference, otherwise we risk squandering their will to change on basically pointless actions. Then again, you could argue that getting people involved at all may lead to better things. Political campaigns use this principle; first they just try and get a sign on your yard. If you'll do that, then they ask for you to talk to your friends, call people, etc. Baby steps. I'm not sure I'm convinced either way, but it's interesting to think about.
    - grandalf 16y ago
      That's a very good point. Considering the sorts of things that people are able to ignore (while paying attention to other, highly insignificant things) I think it's mostly about what feels good to the people doing it. In a world in which seeming "socially responsible" and "environmentally responsible" is a status signal, people will do small things to give off that signal.... while ignoring all sorts of other areas in which the slightest awareness or outrage would lead to immediate change.
      - zackattack 16y ago
        I've enjoyed reading this discussion. Psyonic - I'm helping make http://www.idrumskins.com/CPIT001/index.html http://www.idrumskins.com/CPIT001/index.html ... would you like to contribute? grandalf - I'm curious, what do you do professionally? -Zack zackster@gmail.com