Never trust a product that makes an environmental or social justice claim
Posted by TheShot on 25 Sep 2007 | Tagged as: Beans, Café Society, Consumer Trends, Fair Trade
In the mixed feelings department, the Washington Business Journal recently reported on Counter Culture Coffee’s newest regional training center in D.C.: Counter Culture Coffee opens training center in Adams Morgan - Washington Business Journal:. As with Counter Culture’s other training centers, it is designed to educate industry wonks and general consumers alike on coffee flavors and Fair Trade practices.
On the upside, awareness of what makes good coffee is a very good thing. I wholly support the notion of educating more people on how to make good coffee, from bean to cup. And while Fair Trade practices are hardly secrets anymore, coffee retailers and consumers should be aware of the issues that lead to the creation of Fair Trade.
That said, Counter Culture seems intent on shoehorning the ever-popular wine analogy with coffee consumers. While this is a convenient vehicle for explaining to consumers why a roasted coffee should cost $15 a pound, it’s also very misleading. Consumers are loaded with pre-conceived notions and expectations where the wine tasting model just does not fit — whether it’s the manual skill and chemistry involved in coffee preparation, the completely unromantic ritual of coffee cupping, or the idea of food pairing.
Environmentalism and social justice: today’s marketing jingle?
Counter Culture is avidly Fair Trade at its roots, so it’s no surprise that they actively promote causes they so firmly believe in. But I have personally become further and further disenfranchised with Fair Trade. As with Communism, the devil isn’t in the concept — it is in the detail of how it is executed.
And it’s not just because growers and the environment aren’t being aided to the degree Fair Trade advocates suggest they are. The goals of certification labels such as “Fair Trade” and “organic” have literally been swallowed whole by marketing efforts — not entirely unlike the “buy green” oxymoron. Just as Michael Pollan advised “never trust a food product that makes a health claim” in his book, The Omnivore’s Dilemma, I’ve recently come to the rather radical conclusion of “never trust a product that makes an environmental or social justice claim”. Unfortunately, it’s gotten this bad — and it’s only going to get worse before it gets better.
6 Comments »
on 25 Sep 2007 at 9:19 pm -05:00T 1.Nick said …
You’ve made some big assumptions here that are baseless, particularly Counter Culture vis-a-vis Fair Trade.
“ASS out of U and ME,” they say.
With this and the earlier La Colombe post (not that you should care), I’m removing your blog from my RSS subscription roll.
You used to be fairly accurate in your assessments, but you’ve been severely off-base for a while now.
Good luck, and Godspeed.
on 25 Sep 2007 at 10:28 pm -05:00T 2.TheShot said …
To each his own. But if we’ve touched a nerve, we’ll consider that a mark of success.
Some like to pride themselves on espousing opinions that challenge the status quo — concocting various ‘waves’ that separate themselves from the unenlightened masses. But some also lose stomach when they discover areas where their opinions might be considered status quo. The whimsical inconvenience of opinion can thus be so very messy for personal purposes and ends. But when Che Guevara’s ideals are sold as thousands of silk-screened T-shirts to complicit ‘rebels’, who really has the last laugh?
The best counter to which, of course, is to disengage. Place hands over ears, and thorny inconvenience magically disappears.
on 26 Sep 2007 at 3:45 pm -05:00T 3.pcal said …
Jeez, lighten up, Nick. Where is the controversy here?
It seems to me stunningly obvious that labels like ‘organic’ and ‘fair trade’ and ‘green’ *have* been systematically co-opted by the machinery of consumer marketing. That’s just the horrible genius of modern capitalism at work.
If you don’t like it, fine, but there’s no point in shooting the messenger.
on 26 Sep 2007 at 6:08 pm -05:00T 4.Jaime said …
It was a thought provoking post. There is nothing wrong with questioning anyone who makes big claims or markets their ethics.
If someone who wasn’t personaly invested in the reputation of the company had some critical thoughts, I would take it more seriously.
on 27 Sep 2007 at 10:45 am -05:00T 5.Peter G said …
Hello!
Well, while I’m not sure anyone will take this seriously, since I am personally invested with the reputation of Counter Culture (I am co-owner of the company) I thought I would weigh in anyway.
For what it’s worth, I share in the distrust of environmental and social justice claims for any product- it all-too-easily leads to greenwashing. I am a skeptic about the way that the Fair Trade Certified movement has gone in the past few years.
On the other hand, I feel it’s very useful to talk about environmentalism and social justice as regards consumer products. If we never do, how will consumers know the difference? I mean, if we don’t mention whether a product was sourced with environmental sustainability or fairness in mind, how will consumers know how to make good choices?
In any case, I’m not sure we are subscribing to the same definition of “Fair Trade”. I will proudly wear the mantle of “Fair Trade at the Roots” as long as we are talking about Fair Trade as a value set: the idea that one should deal with business counterparts fairly and transparently, and above all pay top-of-market prices for top quality coffees, working in cooperation with coffee farmers to relentlessly improve coffee quality and, therefore, coffee prices and livelihoods. This is a larger ideal than the “Fair Trade Certified” movement, which I agree is conceptually flawed, given its reliance on base prices co-op exclusivity. And as for the argument that Fair Trade Certified has been co-opted by large business, I would argue that it was designed for that purpose from the very start. The more idiosyncratic and, by definition, “smaller” relationship/quality model (sometimes called Direct Trade, though it goes by many names, and sometimes no name at all!) is, to my mind, a particularly useful and successful “type” of Fair Trade, and one which I am proud to participate in.
Thanks for the kudos on coffee education, I agree that it’s a good thing to educate the industry and consumers alike about great coffee! I’m confused about your antagonism towards the wine analogy; while no analogy is perfect, it has proven useful to illustrating the importance of farming practices, coffee variety, microclimate, craftsmanship, and “specialness” in coffee. And I really disagree with your assessment of cupping as “unromantic”; is it really like taking apart a cow with a hacksaw to get a steak? Really?
Congrats on a thoughtful and detailed blog. Really cool.
Peter G
on 27 Sep 2007 at 1:25 pm -05:00T 6.TheShot said …
Thanks for the clarifications and thoughtful comments, Peter (and others). What Nick likely missed, that I think the rest of you picked up on, is that the cited article was the inspiration for the post — not Counter Culture itself.
While you’re nowhere near my geographical area, from what I know you do a lot of good things, and do them right (e.g., I would have no qualms purchasing coffee from Counter Culture).
But clearly, I do question the wisdom of treating coffee like wine as a means of educating consumers. In regards to cupping in specific, and in doing it right, I just cannot bring myself to making obscene slurping noises like that in mixed company. Not to mention that tasting for bean defects — the real genesis of cupping — is better suited for the wine (i.e., poison) tasters of a medieval king than a pleasurable experience I’d want to share with my friends.
And I really question the intentions of the general masses jumping on the Fair Trade bandwagon these days. (Not unlike my concerns of how much sophisticated marketing is selling us the idea of consuming our way to a greener planet.) Though you should be able tell from this site that I’ve long been an advocate of the Direct Trade efforts many importers and roasters have been doing of late.