Two from WNYC: Coca-Cola + How Soda Works

Two radio segments from the WNYC. The first comes from the Leonard Lopate Show, where journalist and author Michael Blanding discusses the history of Coke, the marketing of Coke from its invention just before the turn of the century (1880s) to the present, and the corporate structure and questionable business practices of The Coca-Cola Company. Where is Coca-Cola made and who makes it? What is the environmental impact of world Coca-Cola production? What exactly are we funding and participating in when we pick up a frosty bottle of Coke? Hear Blandings discuss these questions and more in this brief radio interview (28 minutes), which draws on his new book The Coke Machine: The Dirty Truth Behind the World's Favorite Soft Drink.

Then hear Dr. Kelly Brownell, co-founder and director of the Yale Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity, and author Darcy O'Neil discuss the history of soda from the 1800s to the present in this brief radio interview (30 minutes) from the Please Explain series. Along the way, the pair note the historical relationships between soda, patent medicines, and addictive drugs; the technologies that led to the widespread consumption of soda at the turn of the last century; the relationship between obesity and soda today; and more.

Soda and Food Stamps

The New York Times reports this morning that New York State and the City of New York are petitioning to bar food stamp recipients from using their benefits to buy sodas and other sugary drinks. The request, filed with the US Department of Agriculture on Wednesday, would prevent people enrolled in the food stamp program from using their benefits to purchase the beverages for two years, with the possibility of a permanent ban to follow. You can read the full article here, and a Times editorial in support of the measure here.

The move comes on the heels of New York City's failed attempt to impose a tax on all sodas and sugary beverages earlier this year. You can read a Times article about the soda tax by the prominent food writer Mark Bittman here, and a New York Observer editorial in favor of the tax here. During the debates over the proposed soda tax, critics argued that the state and city governments were disingenuous in their claim that the tax was about the health of the citizenry, and that that tax was simply a way to replenish government coffers that had been depleted by the financial crisis. The current petition seems to lay that criticism to rest--or at least to suggest that if the money raised from taxation was a factor, the health of citizens was also a primary concern.

For a different and more complex take on these issues, see Christopher Bonanos' New York Magazine editorial "Taxa-Cola: Why Tax Soda that We Already Subsidize?" here. Bonanos takes issue with the proposed soda tax on the basis that the root of the problem is not consumer's desire for soda but the federal subsidies and other measures that make high-fructose corn syrup so cheap to begin with: "We pay federal taxes to make that can of Mountain Dew cheaper than it should be, encouraging us to buy it. Then we are scolded by public-health authorities for doing so. Then New York proposes another tax, to discourage us from buying it." In other words, according to Bonano, the tax is a small-scale, local attempt to fix a large-scale, national problem--and an attempt to fix that problem by focusing on individual consumers rather than the system that produces it in the first place. Although Bonanos is writing about the soda tax, it would be easy to extend his argument to the current effort to ban the purchase of soda with food stamps.

Cola for Babies? Check Your Sources

In class last week, a number of small discussion groups were talking about the ethics of "cradle to grave" advertising, which Schlosser discusses in section I.2 of Fast Food Nation, and I was reminded of this advertisement, which caused a flurry of discussion when it appeared (yet again) on the web last spring:


As you can imagine, this ad provoked sharp responses wherever it was posted, ranging from diatribes against corporate cynicism to reflections on the strange naïveté of mid-twentieth century America. Writers wrote, bloggers blogged, comment threads spun out their webs of irritable disagreement and knowing consensus.

The problem is, this is not a real advertisement. A little online research reveals its actual source and the fact that it's a Photoshop mock-up. But there is internal evidence too, which active, critical readers of the ad should have caught.

Imagine the embarrassment you would feel if you were the author of this editorial--or one of the many people (for example, this neuroscience blogger and this forum contributor) who have reposted it and passed it on.

HFCS Drinks + Their Equivalents in Junk Food

This series of photos graphically illustrates the health impact of beverages containing high fructose corn syrup. Enjoy! (via BoingBoing)