Slashdot Mirror
US-Appointed Egg Lobby Paid Food Blogs and Targeted Chef To Crush Vegan Startup
An anonymous reader writes: The American Egg Board targeted publications, popular food bloggers, and a celebrity chef as part of an effort to combat a perceived threat from Hampton Creek, an egg-replacement startup backed by some of Silicon Valley's biggest names, according to internal emails. The Gaurdian reports: A detailed review of emails, sent from inside the AEB and obtained by the Guardian, shows that the lobbyist's anti-Hampton Creek campaign sought to:
- Pay food bloggers as much as $2,500 a post to write online recipes and stories about the virtue of eggs that repeated the egg lobby group's "key messages."
- Confront Andrew Zimmern, who had featured Hampton Creek on his popular Travel Channel show Bizarre Foods and praised the company in a blog post characterized by top egg board executives as a "love letter."
- Target publications including Forbes and Buzzfeed that had written broadly positive articles about a Silicon Valley darling.
- Unsuccessfully tried to recruit both the animal rights and autism activist Temple Grandin and the bestselling author and blogger Ree Drummond to publicly support the egg industry.
- Buy Google advertisements to show AEB-sponsored content when people searched for Hampton Creek or its founder Josh Tetrick.
The whole food-industrial complex in the US is so far out-of-wack with the concept of healthy food it's not even funny.
Want to fix our chronic health / obesity / diabesity problems --
1. Reform campaign finance laws.
2. End corn subsidies.
3. Profit (from good heath).
The Egg Board is an advocate for the consumption of eggs. What's the problem?
This article seems more like a slashvertisement for Hampton Creek
This all sounds like what many companies would do when faced with an upstart competitor - basically what's known as "playing hardball".
If this Hampton Creek company is backed by some of the "biggest names" in Silicon Valley, isn't it well-positioned financially to respond? This doesn't exactly sound like David vs. Goliath.
As an aside - is there such a thing as "Big Egg"? We buy ours from a local farm.
#DeleteChrome
I'm strongly in favor of eggs. Go eggs.
Is OP alleging this activities are all illegal? Are any of these things illegal? I am scratching my head to figure out which one. Maybe buying of the google ads for someone else's trademarks if that was done?
Or should we add to the the Hampton Creek side of the ledger....spammed second rate news for nerds site with hyped up allegations of mean business practices in support of egg replacement for friend working at egg replacement company......
The United States could safely eject several organizations which do not represent the interests the general public:
Department of Agriculture
Chamber of Commerce
Department of Justice
and probably several more
will never happen. ... That's how we grow government, and no party has real desire to reverse it.
Instead we will nominate more czar's of random things, then that person turns into a department
I love how the AEB chair is some fat, unhealthy woman.
Is that why an image of Dr Evil shows up in google images when I search for Google?
Nothing out of the ordinary of what is to be expected from an American lobbyist group. Paying to push your own agenda is not the same as trying to spread FUD and publicly smear a competing agenda.
I am no vegan and I like eating eggs. But I respect vegetarians and vegans, and now I don't want to eat the eggs ptoduced by that organisation. How can I avoid them?
Those are all perfectly legitimate responses to attacks from food-fear mongers.
It's not just one startup--it's a multi-billion dollar industry built on FUD.
so they are doing what all businesses have done when they face other competition, how can this be anything new thing, the guardian seems to have a very slow day, mabe they ran out of click baits
as long as their are not spreading lies or misleading information about their own product or competition then there is nothing to see here
Makes you wonder about where hatchet pieces like this came from. And who lit a fire under the FDA's ass to crack down on the definition of "mayo?"
...why it is not illegal for and organization whose board of directors is selected by the Secretary of Agriculture and whose funding is collected by the United States Government under a mandatory "check off" program, to target a competing industry much less an innovative product, a specific brand and a particular person?
The purpose of these "check offs" (which despite the name are not voluntary) is to promote economic development, foster innovation and promote our commodities overseas. The Egg Council is doing the exact opposite. It is not lawful to spend checkoff money to PROMOTE a particular brand or product. How then can it be legal to spend checkoff funds to ATTACK a specific brand?
Seems to fall under the category of overly-zealous competitive marketing. I didn't see enough to justify verbiage like "crush vegan startup". In fact, I kind of agree with their assessment that it's not "just mayonnaise", that it shouldn't be marketed as such.
I do think that gov't sponsored industry-support groups can be anti-competitive. But I'm not sure they differ materially from other subsidized industries.
This is less a smoking gun than business as usual. Doesn't mean it's not important. Just that this company isn't justified in crying foul very loudly.
I'm a little overly sensitive to the over-sensitivity of Silicon Valley startups. The competitive environment is competitive, perhaps unfair if gov't is involved. But the notion that the state should be impartial or non-interfering is naive in my opinion. The gov't should be considered a player of the competitive landscape rather than referee.
Doesn't mean gov't shouldn't be held accountable for whatever.
These topics tend to become heated so I just want to give my viewpoint on this subject as a vegan of 17 years --
The definition of "veganism" seems to be expanding to encompass environmental, social-justice, feminism, and all kinds of other issues.
These may all be laudable goals to aspire to, but veganism at its heart is a _consumer action_. Veganism is based in _animal rights_, and is a boycott of animal and animal-derived products. "Food" seem to get all the attention, but a vegan won't wear products derived from animals, use animal-based or tested cosmetics, etc. Rational vegans also have to live in the real-world, and sometimes make exceptions for products which don't have cruelty-free counterparts.
Veganism is about choosing the path of _least harm_ when presented with a _choice_ -- it's not about being a perfect person. If you are aware of your choices and their consequences when they are presented, and strive to take the right path, you're already doing the right thing.
I read the TFA, I even went to the news article at the Guardian, and still I can't find any real link !
It is easy to say that so and so lobby paid thousands to blogs to publish this or that, but until we can read the articles in question ourselves, how are we to believe anything reported in the news article is true?
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
It's always an unfair (evil illuminati) conspiracy when some vegan hippy talks shit about mainstream food for profit and ends up with naught. But whatever they have support from their imaginary pleiadian collective.
Ha! I have been a vegetarian since the age of 18, which means I have been a vegetarian longer than I haven't. Became a vegetarian because I think it's better for health. For the first 8 years I was a vegan but later started eating cheese. What I miss here is the point of artificial eggs, the point of artificial anything. Why bother? If you are a vegetarian or a vegan, why bother eating something that is like an artificial egg in the first place?
You can't handle the truth.
This has literally nothing to do with news for nerds.
Normal eggs? Nope.
Vegan lifestyle? Nope.
Corruption, legal or otherwise? Nope.
Technically, all posts are off-topic in this thread.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Makes you wonder how much these Silicon Valley big names paid Slashdot for this advertisement.
Why not Humpty Creek?
Some part of "Gubbmint" does. BLM is conspicuously silent. "Gubbmint" isn't as monolithically conspiratorial as Scientifically Illiterate Bozos like you assume; or why is it that Republicans, who _are_ monolithically conspiratorial, wield so much power?
This has absolutely nothing to do with all of the attention they were getting the other week over their argument that nobody would see their product labeled "Just Mayo" and think it was Mayonnaise.
The Egg Board is an advocate for the consumption of eggs. What's the problem?
This article seems more like a slashvertisement for Hampton Creek
The problem is a fraud on the public. Advocating a position that is based on who pays you, without regard to reason or truth or the benefit to mankind, without so much as a notice of your bias, causes massive amounts of harm to the public by sustaining inefficient practices.
It is perhaps the single most harmful activity to society a person can engage in--it wastes other people's lives. It perpetuates the spread of misinformation.
And it is fundamentally contrary to the ideals of Nerds, Geeks, and those who believe in the potential of science and information to help mankind get out of the mess we've made of our world and our societies.
Add to it the Vegan lobby that has changed from being militant and instead playing victims in all situations. The result is that they try to make us feel guilty for eating eggs, drinking milk and even chewing on imported fruits.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
Chinese made fake egg is already a problem.
http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/11/06/how-to-make-a-rotten-egg/
I really don't see an issue if the Egg board markets eggs. Zimmer's program is paid placement, so this company PAID him to promote their Vegan Fake Egg, so its a little hypocritical of them to complain when real eggs are marketed!
Really, who cares what they think? *pauses for reflection*
"I believe this and therefore you should too!" - is that persuading you? Well then... I rest my case.
Just stop listening to all the talking heads and the world becomes a much nice place ;D
Requiem for the American Dream
I don't get it
eggs? lobby group? blogs? articles?
Is it blogs? I guess that is remotely techy?!?
It is The Guardian, beloved of the Left. You don't need to question them, it is unseemly and icky. Everything they print is true, because it agrees with the Left's pre-existing ideas. Anything contradictory is simply not printed in the first place. This is one of the big reasons the Left has gone off the rails into obsessed hate in the past 20 years, they live in an echo chamber and think that dissident opinions have no place in political speech.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
I have lots of recipes involving eggs, would you pay me two grand per recipe for me to post them on a blog?
Love,
A terminal ovovore.
Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
That should read 'The Grauniad reports' , everyone knows that.
Those egg council creeps have gotten through to you too hey?
http://simpsons.wikia.com/wiki/The_Egg_Council_Guy
Well... $subject says it all, doesn't it?
This has literally nothing to do with news for nerds.
And how about stuff that matters?
Slashdot has never, ever been excluively tech topics.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
It is The Guardian, beloved of the Left. You don't need to question them, it is unseemly and icky. Everything they print is true, because it agrees with the Left's pre-existing ideas. Anything contradictory is simply not printed in the first place. This is one of the big reasons the Left has gone off the rails into obsessed hate in the past 20 years, they live in an echo chamber and think that dissident opinions have no place in political speech.
I certainly do not agree with everything the Gaurdian prints, but it is worth remembering that as it is a UK publication they have printed this knowing that if they can't prove every word they would be sued into oblivion for liable under the strong laws we have in the UK. We also have a slightly more regulated press than the you in the US in terms of a body that overseas them and force retractions if they print anything that is utterly made up.
So with that in mind you can be fairly sure that there is a fair amount of substance to this story unlike half the crap that the right wing press in the US run with where your free speech laws allow them to just make stuff up. All you have to prove in the US is that although you printed a pack of lies you did not do it "maliciously". Since that maliciousness is almost impossible to prove in court the you can get away with far more.
I dont read
A Lobby does what a Lobby does and is supposed to and this is news?
It's what lobbyists do all day, they buy elections even, egg on their face is nothing to them.
I also fail to see the 'news for nerds' and 'things that matter' angle, unless it's the fact that a blogger was mentioned somewhere along the line.
Isn't this how the war started in Gullivers tale?
Well, on Slashdot, a lot of folks like to gripe about the "Big Oil" or "Big Pharma" lobbies.
I guess what we have here is a case of the "Big Egg" lobby.
"Hey! Youse got Big Eggs . . . ?"
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
Real link to what? A reporter wrote a report on some leaked information. You're asking for the source material? The emails which were leaked? The Guardian isn't Wikileaks, they operate under the old model of credibility - you're supposed to read the article and believe it not because you've gone through hundreds of emails yourself, but because the Guardian is Britain's most reputable newspaper and you trust that they've done due diligence.
This is not unreasonable, they have nearly two hundred years worth of claim to that trust, but okay - let's say you love Wikileaks and hate traditional journalism. Even if that's the case, there are instances where publishing source material can compromise the safety and identity of the informant. Even Wikileaks recognized this and acted with some measure of caution with the State Department leak. They gave the information unredacted but confidentially to some traditional journalists who then picked out and published only the pertinent information... and then blew the whole thing by publishing the encryption key. Okay fine, but that was accidental.
The point being that even if it might be nice for a traditional paper to change their methods a bit and publish more of the source material, now that the internet exists and archives like that are easy things to make available, the onus of believeability should be on the lobbyists to disprove this.
"The result is that they try to make us feel guilty for eating eggs, drinking milk and even chewing on imported fruits."
It's a yolk we have to bear.
The fact you think "The Left" is some monolithic entity with a single goal speaks volumes for how abjectly childish and oversimplified your view of the world is. Seriously. It's embarrassing to read someone launch such a poorly thought-out tirade against half of the political spectrum as if it is one entity. You really need to read more.
And yet, astonishingly enough, there are more than 130 comments from people involved in this discussion, coming from the tried & true Slashdot user perspective.
Funny, that.
I've been reading this site for over 15 years, and not a week goes by when somebody doesn't make that same general complaint. It's a cliche at this point. A super cliche. A human behavioral bug. Predictable mechanical behavior which has no effect other than to broadcast one's Missing The Point.
You'd better run, egg!
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
I don't think Americans should be eating artificial eggs. Crush the startup!
"So one of those Egg Council creeps got to you too, huh?"
The result is that they try to make us feel guilty for eating eggs, drinking milk and even chewing on imported fruits.
There is a difference between expressing a viewpoint you yourself truly believe and bullying others to express that viewpoint. Whether you believe them or not is entirely up to you.
Ideology: A tool used primarily to avoid the bother of thinking.
The Egg Board also says they talked about doing the things mentioned, but didn't actually do them. If they did, they should get smacked down for it as two wrongs != right. However, the same applies to an article that fails to mention the key reason why the AEB and FDA reacted as they did.
It's called "Just Mayo". Mayonnaise has a formal definition that includes eggs. Furthermore, the label has a big picture of an egg! That's why the AEB and FDA are ticked off. It's a blatant case of false advertising.
To invoke argumentum ad monsantium, you must be shilling for Big Chicken.
Or to invoke argumentum ad pomum, you're one of those fanboix who just love eggs so much that whenever a hen clucks, you're standing in line to grab the egg, knowing that it has to be way better than yesterday's egg.
It's just not true you tool. Just like black people can't be racist and women can't be sexists, the left/progressives can't be accused of confirmation bias. Only those darn conservatives/republicans do that.
The story may well be true. The problem is that you may never see the counter story on everything vegan activists groups are doing to promote THEIR lifestyle. If the egg council, or whoever, are paying for promotion, it's fine to let people know about it. But are they also going to let us know when leftist groups do the same thing? Because it's not honest journalism if you're only going to call out the people and movements you don't like, while giving a free pass to those you like.
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
You can always calm yourself with some yolka exercises.
Which came first, Big Egg or Big Chicken?
It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
Those "strong libel laws" and censorship boards exist to protect important UK personalities and further UK political interests; the idea that they protect foreign governments from being badmouthed by UK publications is ridiculously naive.
This story happens to be true: the US pays vast amounts of money to its agricultural lobby and agricultural lobbies heavily influence what the US government tells the people about food. Of course, what the Guardian neglects to tell you is that the crap that's going on with agricultural subsidies and agricultural lobbies in Europe is just as bad, if not worse. The purpose of articles like that is to distract ignorant Europeans from the enormous problems in Europe, which are being swept under the rug by your elites and your government controlled media. And while anti-Americanism serves the political elites and media in Europe to distract Europeans from their problems, Americans generally don't give a crap about all the political, social, and economic dysfunction in Europe.
I guess what we have here is a case of the "Big Egg" lobby.
Gettin ostricher and ostricher at our expense.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
It is [Right-Wing Rag], beloved of the Right. You don't need to question them, it is unseemly and icky. Everything they print is true, because it agrees with the Right's pre-existing ideas. Anything contradictory is simply not printed in the first place. This is one of the big reasons the Right has gone off the rails into obsessed hate in the past 20 years, they live in an echo chamber and think that dissident opinions have no place in political speech.
Yup. Still holds true.
How fortunate that the Guardian isn't the only journalistic outlet out there...
They're not under any obligation to run a story just because you think that it's not fair. If you don't like their slant, then don't support them.
Also, if you could provide an example of where "vegan activists" have engaged in this sort of behavior, it would go a long way towards making your argument credible.
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
It's an extension of conservative absolutism. When presented with a solution that came from anywhere but the echo chamber, the right dismisses anything that isn't a magic bullet that fixes it 100% without any side effects.
I realize that's me calling the kettle black when I refer to the "right" as a monolithic entity, but the general philosophy is to dismiss anything that wasn't their idea, or is too complicated to think about in terms of shades of grey. Conservatives tend to latch on to the simple, ideological solutions without any concern for anything they don't care about. For example: It's all well and good that Trump wants to deport 12 million people. That's an attractive sound bite that fits nicely on a bumper sticker, but it ignores how complex the issue is. Complexity tends to mean expensive. Who's going to pay for identifying and rounding up all those folks? Where are they processed for deportation? How do we transport them to the border? Who replaces the cheap labor that the agricultural industry relies on? I find that they refuse to see the world as it is, but how they think it should be.
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
In one e-mail, the idea is floated of having the Hampton Creek CEO murdered.
A typical UK cereal with milk is in the 125-150 calorie range. Even the worst sugar laden ones are only about 350 calories per bowl.
I don't know the size of your bowl but 60 grams of oat flakes (that stuff in muesli) plus 80 grams of 0.5% milk is 253 calories.
No added sugar, flavor or anything.
You want extra flavor, add fruit or a couple of spoons of fruit yogurt.
At about 84 calories per 100 grams for those yogurts which don't contain extra fructose for taste.
Slice an average peach into it and that's about 40 more calories per 100 grams, or about 1 peach.
Or a banana for 90 calories per 100 grams, or about 110 calories per banana.
So, a bowl of "healthy", raw, low calorie fruit and unprocessed cereals with low fat milk is in the range of 290-370 calories, for about a 200 ml bowl.
I'm guessing that your "typical" bowl might actually be a "small" bowl and OP's bowl may be a "medium" to "large" bowl.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
That the hollywood types, blogging about the dangers of this or that to try to destroy other industries that aren't on their "good" side. All things are politics. It just depends on which side of the isle you are on, to consider it good or bad.
Slashdot tries to read the pulse of the community in order to fulfill the "Stuff that Matters" mantra. Classically, these "off-topic" topics have been religious, civil, political, etc.. In the past several years there has been a huge uptick of interest in dietary matters within Slashdot. Hence...eggs.
This is completely unnecessary. There is NO substitute for scrambled eggs with bacon.
is there even any point to correcting you?
It is called advertising.
Now if a blog takes money then the issue is with the blog IMHO.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
I've not heard that before..associating what one eats and dietary choices to being Left or Right?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
That is unpossible.
Synthetic eggs are dumb.
Synthetic meat is dumb.
These are things we can easily grow out in our pastures using natural cycles that help to sequester carbon and produce nutrients for the vegetable part of the farming cycle.
When you make synthetic versions you're using Big Corp's Big Chemicals under their control with Big Petro to create an inferior, synthetic version that goes bad in Big Ways with Big Recalls. You are giving up control to the big guys. Dumb, dumb, dumb.
Get a chicken. Get free eggs. Eat the chicken when you're done and get another chicken. Wow! Works!
I bought some "Just Mayo" and was a bit annoyed when I tried it and it ended up not being mayonnaise. I'm fine with non-mayo spreads, but be clear about what you are. Their name is misleading IMO and makes you think that it is, well, mayonnaise. If that's the particular flavour you are going for and you get something else, well that annoying.
The UK press is perfectly capable of lying through their teeth and getting away with it as long as they do it about the right people. I've personally seen ombudsmen and others in the appeal process flat out say they know something was wholly untrue, libellious, and that they don't give a fuck.
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
who hatched this plan?
"Big Chicken"
Must be descended from the dinosaurs!
"Snooping as usual, I see."
-- Dr. Eggman
Yeah, Big Vegan is such a threat to the American way of life.
You should feel guilty. Your culinary pleasure comes at the cost of suffering. But you're more important than any other creature so it's OK.
It seems you are equivocating being Vegan (and maybe even vegetarian) to being Left/Liberal?
I've not heard that before..associating what one eats and dietary choices to being Left or Right?
Wasn't Hitler a vegetarian, or is that some urban myth?
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
About as much point as a flat earther "correcting" someone saying that the earth is roughly spherical and revolves around the sun.
This seems like good old fashioning marketing. I eat eggs everyday and my cholesterol is very low (150s)....Get over it.....
There are plenty of industrial farming practices you should feel guilty about. Egg production included. Go ahead and blame the mean old vegans though.
It's about ethics in food journalism!!! #EggGate