Jump to content
  • Welcome to the eG Forums, a service of the eGullet Society for Culinary Arts & Letters. The Society is a 501(c)3 not-for-profit organization dedicated to the advancement of the culinary arts. These advertising-free forums are provided free of charge through donations from Society members. Anyone may read the forums, but to post you must create a free account.

The ethical purchasing topic


Fat Guy

Recommended Posts

With the recent announcement of an ethical purchasing policy by Burger King, the phenomenon of ethical purchasing has come fully into the mainstream.

According to the New York Times's coverage:

In what animal welfare advocates are describing as a “historic advance,” Burger King, the world’s second-largest hamburger chain, said yesterday that it would begin buying eggs and pork from suppliers that did not confine their animals in cages and crates.

The company said that it would also favor suppliers of chickens that use gas, or “controlled-atmospheric stunning,” rather than electric shocks to knock birds unconscious before slaughter. It is considered a more humane method, though only a handful of slaughterhouses use it.

Please do feel free to discuss Burger King's new policy on this topic. However, going forward, this topic is intended to be the master topic for discussion of ethical purchasing. Thus, if additional companies make ethical purchasing announcements, we'll consolidate that discussion on this topic. After a time, we may start a successor topic as we sometimes do.

Steven A. Shaw aka "Fat Guy"
Co-founder, Society for Culinary Arts & Letters, sshaw@egstaff.org
Proud signatory to the eG Ethics code
Director, New Media Studies, International Culinary Center (take my food-blogging course)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thre's some hypocresy on this BK statements. The producers can feed the animals with GM food and use clembuterol and other hormones to increase the weight but in the end they can not use electric shocks during the slaughtering.

Why don't they worry about serving good quality food with no trans fats instead of making such marketing advertising about how ethical they are.

In Spain the health authorities has demanded them for advertising hypercaloric food and breaking their compromise against obesity.

Rogelio Enríquez aka "Rogelio"
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While you can find hypocrisies in BK's move, to me it's at least a little encouraging that there are enough food producers that work in this relatively more humane fashion to supply the US's (world's?) second largest fast-food chain. I don't think Burger King would have switched if they weren't absolutely positive that they could keep the same volume of meat or whatever moving through their stores. Yeah, it's not much more than a marketing gimmick but it's better than introducing a super-huge new sandwich. Hopefully getting a corporation this big making at least a few "ethical" purchases will spur even more improvements in the food production industry, it's not really like there's any other incentives for huge industrial producers to re-think how they work.

So not a bad start, but lets also consider where they're getting their lettuce, fruit, soft drinks, food containers, employee uniforms, restaurant locations, etc. before Burger King gets that ethical crown.

peace

Dan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The goal for the next few months, Burger King said is for 2 percent of its eggs to be “cage free,” and for 10 percent of its pork to come from farms that allow sows to move around inside pens, rather than being confined to crates. The company said those percentages would rise as more farmers shift to these methods and more competitively priced supplies become available.

Hmm, 2% of eggs and 10% of pork? Is pork even a popular menu item at BK? The main thing they sell is beef, and the factory farming of cattle is every bit as problematic as it is with chickens and pigs. I do think it's good they're going to be using better suppliers for a portion of their food, and it will probably add up to a large volume of purchases. But it seems like this is a relatively small change for them overall and they're using it to frame BK as a company that makes ethical purchases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was wondering what the next sound bite was gonna be. Why do I get the feeling that "ethical purchasing" is on its way to becoming a meaningless phrase (if it didn't actually start out that way)? Am I just being cynical? (Moi?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While you can find hypocrisies in BK's move, to me it's at least a little encouraging that there are enough food producers that work in this relatively more humane fashion to supply the US's (world's?) second largest fast-food chain.  I don't think Burger King would have switched if they weren't absolutely positive that they could keep the same volume of meat or whatever moving through their stores.

We-ell, it's a pretty low percentage of overall food that they're talking about...2% of eggs and 10% of pork. What about chicken? Beef? Organic/local veggies?

I think it's a great symbolic move, but I wonder how much farther down the road they'll be able to get before they have to start raising prices...is it a sustainable model for such a large business?

"We had dry martinis; great wing-shaped glasses of perfumed fire, tangy as the early morning air." - Elaine Dundy, The Dud Avocado

Queenie Takes Manhattan

eG Foodblogs: 2006 - 2007

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right, it is a really small part, but it's small part of something enormous. In terms of food and money moved, even a part of BK's breakfast sales has got to be more the sales of all of the restaurants that make a point of using ethical food products. If nothing else it could keep a few pork and egg producers out of a race-to-the-bottom approach when it comes to raising and slaughtering animals and that's got to be good for people that are concerned about where their food comes from. I'm far from a corporate apologist but, if there is going to be a Burger King I would like to see it at least make an attempt to make food that isn't ethically compromised.

Of course this assumes this isn't part of some nefarious plan or dodge on BK's part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While you can find hypocrisies in BK's move, to me it's at least a little encouraging that there are enough food producers that work in this relatively more humane fashion to supply the US's (world's?) second largest fast-food chain.  I don't think Burger King would have switched if they weren't absolutely positive that they could keep the same volume of meat or whatever moving through their stores.

We-ell, it's a pretty low percentage of overall food that they're talking about...2% of eggs and 10% of pork. What about chicken? Beef? Organic/local veggies?

I think it's a great symbolic move, but I wonder how much farther down the road they'll be able to get before they have to start raising prices...is it a sustainable model for such a large business?

That's two percent in the next few months. This percentage is scheduled to increase to 5% for eggs and 20% for pork by the end of the year, and continue increasing after that. The reason beef wasn't included was that cattle are already raised outdoors (never mind that they spend that time wallowing in their own shit) and they already have a slaughtering plan in place.

One thing which I found interesting that BK doesn't plan to use these initiatives in their marketing campaigns.

Martin Mallet

<i>Poor but not starving student</i>

www.malletoyster.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would it be possible for a mainstream corporation to adopt an ethical purchasing policy and not generate enormous amounts of skepticism, even cynicism? At the same time, will any real change take place in our food supply without the backing of a big corporation?

Todd A. Price aka "TAPrice"

Homepage and writings; A Frolic of My Own (personal blog)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Though they wouldn't have done this if it wasn't good business for them, I welcome the shift. I'm also glad that they have done this without caving in to the anti-foie gras elements. :wink::raz:

John Sconzo, M.D. aka "docsconz"

"Remember that a very good sardine is always preferable to a not that good lobster."

- Ferran Adria on eGullet 12/16/2004.

Docsconz - Musings on Food and Life

Slow Food Saratoga Region - Co-Founder

Twitter - @docsconz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Though they wouldn't have done this if it wasn't good business for them, I welcome the shift. I'm also glad that they have done this  without caving in to the anti-foie gras elements. :wink:  :raz:

Oh yeah, the bacon double cheese burger with a slice of foie is my favorite item on the value menu.

I wonder if the small percentages are actually a good thing. When Wal-Mart announced its big push into organic, there was a lot of concern expressed that this would overwhelm small producers.

How exactly will BK promote this? It seems tricky. Whole Foods success rests on its ability to appeal to shoppers with both taste and ethical concerns (yes, I know that organic doesn't equal better taste, but that's not how it's marketed). I think Steven, in another thread, mentioned Chipotle's use of Nimen Ranch products as a precedent. Again, though, Chipotle can promote this move on both taste and ethical grounds.

If BK is only using 10%-20% "ethical products," then its PR machine can really only promote the ethical benefits of this move. "Come to BK, help animals, and have a 1 in 5 chance of getting some better tasting pork" might not be the best slogan. Maybe these will be specially designated items.

Todd A. Price aka "TAPrice"

Homepage and writings; A Frolic of My Own (personal blog)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe a good slogan would be "98% unethical for now, but aiming to be only 80% unethical."

Steven A. Shaw aka "Fat Guy"
Co-founder, Society for Culinary Arts & Letters, sshaw@egstaff.org
Proud signatory to the eG Ethics code
Director, New Media Studies, International Culinary Center (take my food-blogging course)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing which I found interesting that BK doesn't plan to use these initiatives in their marketing campaigns.

Except by releasing statements quoted in articles in the NY Times and on sites like eGullet! :wink: But not in their official campaigns/ad dollars, huh?

Eater has a post today about the book The End of the Line by Charles Clover, about overfishing. Apparently:

The agenda of the book is clear, and no one from fishermen to eaters avoid Clover's there-will-be-no-fish-left-if-you're-not-careful wrath. Included in the mix is a serious attack on restaurants Nobu and Koi, and at least two other bigtime New York chefs, Laurent Tourondel and David Bouley. The core issue: there is a hell of a lot of endangered fish on our city's best menus; with all the attention we pay to fur and and foie gras, you'd think we could have some concern for the fish too.

Their post includes a link to some excerpts (haven't had a chance to read them yet, myself).

"We had dry martinis; great wing-shaped glasses of perfumed fire, tangy as the early morning air." - Elaine Dundy, The Dud Avocado

Queenie Takes Manhattan

eG Foodblogs: 2006 - 2007

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps a step in an "ethical" direction, perhaps pr. One devil in the detail omitted is how the chickens are raised. Sure they may experience a more humane last few seconds of life, but what if all that leads up to that is a feces drenched nightmare. Also, does any of what BK intends really made the flesh more healthy for consumers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, it's a miniscule step, but it is a step in the right direction.

As a vocal food activist, my goal and the goal of the organizations I represent is nothing less than a revolution in the food system. We cannot expect to succeeed at this without the support, or at least the acquiesence, of the major global food monopolies.

I am not a WalMart shopper or a Burger King fan. But when they do something right, we should acknowledge it, be appreciative, and then press them to do more.

The fact that WalMart is buying/selling organic food, while their system is flawed, is better than not doing so at all because it is bringing the idea of sustainable food to the masses (even if imperfectly). Chipotle buys its pork from Niman Ranch - that's a good thing. BK is trying to get in on the movement too, and that's fine.

I won't allow them to take credit for things they're not really doing, and I will push them to do it fully, rather than mere token gestures, but if the big corporations are starting to play our game, movements such as Slow Food and Chef's Collaborative should not feel threatened. Instead we should say, "Thanks, welcome to a better way, let's move forward together. Here are some ways you can do more."

Peace,

kmf

www.KurtFriese.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I won't allow them to take credit for things they're not really doing, and I will push them to do it fully, rather than mere token gestures, but if the big corporations are starting to play our game, movements such as Slow Food and Chef's Collaborative should not feel threatened.  Instead we should say, "Thanks, welcome to a better way, let's move forward together.  Here are some ways you can do more."

Devotay, I'm curious. Why do you think Slow Food and Chef's Collaborative would feel threatened or resentful? To my mind, we should all be pulling in the same direction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Devotay, I'm curious. Why do you  think Slow Food and Chef's Collaborative would feel threatened or resentful? To my mind, we should all be pulling in the same direction.

I'm not saying that as movements they would or should. I am saying that many activists, both within and without these very worthwhile organizations will tend to have knee-jerk reactions when WalMart or Burger King or McDonalds or Monsanto actually do something "right" - something we have been pushing them to do. For many, their reaction is to instantaneously mistrust and deny any maneuver such entities make, so that even if they were to reform, were to have a true change of heart, those who react in this manner would refuse to see it, in a perverse retelling of the boy who cried wolf.

TAPrice is asking roughly the same questions above as I am. We cannot ask these institutions to change their ways and then scoff when they do, even if it is only a partial effort. No revolution has ever happened easily, nor overnight.

Peace,

kmf

www.KurtFriese.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Devotay, I'm curious. Why do you  think Slow Food and Chef's Collaborative would feel threatened or resentful? To my mind, we should all be pulling in the same direction.

I'm not saying that as movements they would or should. I am saying that many activists, both within and without these very worthwhile organizations will tend to have knee-jerk reactions when WalMart or Burger King or McDonalds or Monsanto actually do something "right" - something we have been pushing them to do. For many, their reaction is to instantaneously mistrust and deny any maneuver such entities make, so that even if they were to reform, were to have a true change of heart, those who react in this manner would refuse to see it, in a perverse retelling of the boy who cried wolf.

TAPrice is asking roughly the same questions above as I am. We cannot ask these institutions to change their ways and then scoff when they do, even if it is only a partial effort. No revolution has ever happened easily, nor overnight.

Of course you are correct, though it is difficult to not look at something like this without a cynical eye. There is no doubt in my mind that they are doing what they are doing because they see profit in it. Of course, that is a wonderful thing if this approach is now considered potentially profitable by big companies so long as they don't co-opt and ultimately distort the result.

John Sconzo, M.D. aka "docsconz"

"Remember that a very good sardine is always preferable to a not that good lobster."

- Ferran Adria on eGullet 12/16/2004.

Docsconz - Musings on Food and Life

Slow Food Saratoga Region - Co-Founder

Twitter - @docsconz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course you are correct, though it is difficult to not look at something like this without a cynical eye. There is no doubt in my mind that they are doing what they are doing because they see profit in it. Of course, that is a wonderful thing if this approach is now considered potentially profitable by big companies so long as they don't co-opt and ultimately distort the result.

That's the trick, isn't it?

We must use the tools available, and capitalism is certainly one of those tools.

If the goal is sustainability, then one aspect of that must be financial sustainability. Therefore any model for a new food system we put forward must be able to support itself as a business model as well as in quality & environmental terms.

Say what you will about the big conglomerates (and I certainly have), but they sure know how to run a profitable business. Well, the folk in my camp know a lot about high-quality, highly nutritious, sustainable, delicious food. This is not a one way street. We have lots to teach them, and they just might have a thing or two to teach us.

Doc, I'm as big a cynic as the next guy. But if we slap'em down everytime they do something that's a little bit right, then they'll never do anything that's totally right. So I say we tell'em "nice job, now do more."

Cuz if they see no support, they'll stop. Their one prime directive (sorry to show my geek side here) is that of the Ferngi - "Where is the profit in it?" Thus we must show them the profit.

Peace,

kmf

www.KurtFriese.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are not wrong. This was, I think the thinking behind Rick Bayless' Burger King promotion or at least part of it.

John Sconzo, M.D. aka "docsconz"

"Remember that a very good sardine is always preferable to a not that good lobster."

- Ferran Adria on eGullet 12/16/2004.

Docsconz - Musings on Food and Life

Slow Food Saratoga Region - Co-Founder

Twitter - @docsconz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are not wrong. This was, I think the thinking behind Rick Bayless' Burger King promotion or at least part of it.

Yep, or at least, that's what he said. he also acknowledged that it didn't work.

I am not in the camp of those who still hold a grudge against him for that. In fact I never did. I (or any of us) probably could have told him it wouldn't work, if only for the obvious too-much-too-soon reasons, but I like that he ran into that brick wall full speed, like he left a Rick Bayless-shaped hole in it the wall.

We continue to make progress though, we dreamers, underground revolutionaries coming to the surface, we happy few. I think Slow Food Nation will do much to raise awareness as well, taking us another step down the path.

Peace,

kmf

www.KurtFriese.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...