Not so fruity

Editorial note: If you have not yet read our mission statement above, please do so in order that you can put our blogs in context. 

9 February 2013

A snippet concerning a well-known soft drinks company in commentator Simon Hoggart’s weekly miscellany column in today’s London Guardian shows up the mismatch between what it says on the tin and what is actually in the tin.

Two of his readers, he says, bought a fruit smoothie, marketed by Innocent, sporting a faux-naïf label “showing a happy fruit with a halo around its head”.

The front of the pack promises “strawberries, blackberries and raspberries”.

The back of the pack reveals, however, that the drink contains three-quarters of a crushed strawberry, one crushed raspberry and the grand total of two blackberries.

Hoggart adds the less than mind-boggling information that Innocent is owned by Coca-Cola.  Well, who would have thunk it?

Says it all, really. No need for comment.

Thank goodness for the benefits of the global market-place!

And for those nice cuddly multinationals catering so scrupulously and transparently to our every need!


 You might perhaps care to view some of our earlier posts.  For instance:

1. Why? or How? That is the question (3 Jan 2012)

2. Partitocracy v. Democracy (20 July 2012)

3. The shoddiest possible goods at the highest possible prices (2 Feb 2012)

4. Capitalism in practice  (4 July 2012) 

5.Ladder  (21 June 2012)

 6. A tale of two cities (1)  (6 June 2012)

 7. A tale of two cities (2)  (7 June 2012)

 8. Where’s the beef? Ontology and tinned meat (31 Jan 2012)

Every so often we shall change this sample of previously published posts.


This entry was posted in Economics and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s