Last night, a friend on Twitter (who runs this excellent blog) asked me if I thought John Mackey should be fired for his remarks in the Wall Street Journal on health insurance reform, which got me thinking that maybe I should delineate my feelings about Whole Foods, the boycott, and the dust-up as a whole, just so regular readers know where this blog stands.
I want to make clear that despite all my writing about Whole Foods’ and John Mackey’s woes, I’m totally non-committal about the boycott against Whole Foods. I’m a blogger not a boycotter on this one. I’m non-committal about a boycott because the whole issue is really about the man at the top of the flow chart, not Whole Foods as a business. Mackey has stumbled as a CEO, and, as a voyeur of the natural foods industry, I’m interested in the resulting drama that he’s created for himself. Or, in other words, I enjoy watching self-important captains of industry slip and land in a pile of their own crap. Can I get a yee haw!
But that doesn’t make me a boycott supporter. In fact, I think people are giving this boycott way, way too much credit — and they should stop saying ridiculous nonsense in public if they want the boycott to go away. For example, the kind of impact that Michael Pollan imagines (“If [Whole Foods] were to disappear..”) is shockingly preposterous for a man of his intelligence and reputation. The only thing his weigh-in will do is drive people to the boycott’s Facebook page who hadn’t heard about the issue already. Like this:
Oblivious Whole Foods Shopper: “What’s Pollan talking abou here?…wait…John Mackey said WHAT??”
Which is doubly ridiculous because the boycott will go away on its own assuming there are no more forthcoming celebrity endorsements of Whole Foods (Alice Waters? Just keep yer yap shut, hear?). Why will it go away? Because the boycott is utterly pointless. There is no stated goal, no end game, no action that Whole Foods can take for which the boycotters are boycotting. Do boycotters seek the removal of CEO Mackey? Do they want a formal Whole Foods endorsement of Obama’s health insurance reform policies? An apology from Mackey? A pony? A monkey? We have no idea. It’s just sputtering outrage made manifest on the internet, and Pollan is giving it far more attention by casting his considerable limelight that way.
But by that same token, I’m not denouncing the boycott either because I happen to agree strongly with Michael Hiltzik in his LA Times editorial. In a capitalist society, boycotting is just about the only recourse that consumers have to voice an opinion on how a certain business is conducting itself. It’s also a key component of “ethical shopping,” which Whole Foods customers are intimately familiar. A CEO can get an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal just by telling his secretary to make it so. How do regular people respond to that in kind? They can’t. Whole Foods shoppers can’t vote against Mackey in the next Manager’s General Election, and they can’t get a pulpit as bully as his. So boycotts serve a crucial function in a democracy that leans so heavily on its ginormous businesses.
But me boycotting Whole Foods would be utterly meaningless. I’m lucky enough to live in the Twin Cities which sports an elaborate and mature local foods system. Right now my fridge is literally stuffed with produce grown by small, indie, local farmers, many of whom I call friends. Whole Foods? I haven’t stepped in the local Whole Foods in literally years (and even then, I probably didn’t buy a damn thing). I shop at Whole Foods happily when I’m travelling and that’s about it.
As for Mackey’s actual remarks on health care, Mackey shouldn’t be fired. But his employers may feel differently. I’m certain his stockholders are making life uncomfortable for Mr. Mackey, and I know if I were on the Board at Whole Foods, I’d be asking him, “Why the hell are you mixing my money with your politics?” But that’s beetween the Whole Foods Board and its CEO, and it will be fun to watch that drama play out, for this voyeur.
But boycott? Eh. Whatever.
The pesticide-slathered “conventionally grown” produce (at premium prices and often unlabeled) far outnumber the organic choices.
Local food? What local food?
A sea of GMO-containing “natural” foods, again at very elite prices.
Red-list seafood on sale right there next to the sustainable free-range baby sea urchin whiskers.
Hot on Wal-Mart’s heels for title of biggest labor-buster.
Peppers from Holland, shrimp from China. Screw it, its all profit.
Just <em>try</em> to find out what’s in the salad bar. Get escorted out the door.
“We sell a lot of junk”. Oh, no kidding?
Gellato bars!
Made from raw cacao and the tears of free-range baby Gellatos, harvested at moonlight deep in the Amazonian rainforest. Or some shit.
Nice one. The tears of free range baby Gellatos? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.
Never underestimate the power of withholding the almight dollar….you may think it’s not going to produce much…and maybe it won’t…but to shoot it down before it has even begun..this is just one action in a list of actions that people are involved with right now…I’m a college student from the 60′s and have seen the power of grassroots organizing…Brought to you by the generation who gave you the Civil Rights Act, The Women’s Movement and the end to the Vietnam War!!! Power to the people, baby!!
I’m speaking as someone who’s organized many, many such actions: Boycotts need a goal, beyond withholding the almighty dollar, so that the participants have a prize on which to keep their eyes, to paraphrase MLK. Withholding money certainly is a potent action, but how much should be withheld? When will boycotters be able to declare victory? Without a goal (i.e., boycotting until Mackey is fired or an apology is garnered from him), the campaign’s energy will fritter away, like a protest march with no destination.
Slightly off topic, but I do have a question: Since we’re discussing all kinds of ways to fight the bad guys in the food industry in this blog, at what point does freedom of speech become slander? I hope Whole Foods didn’t write you a letter. If they did, how would we handle that? How about the other companies we talk about in this blog? I want to be free to throw dirt at whoever and whatever I need to,(unapologetically) in order to get my point across and make change.
I am not a Whole Foods shopper either. I shopped there a few times when I was in New York this summer, just for some quick salad bar dinner. I do, however, think that Mackey is a huge douche and has made Whole Foods look bad. They are having to do major damage control to clean this one up.
I just want the freedom to talk as much trash as I possibly can, whenever I feel the need to. Is that okay in a blog without feeling like Monsanto will sue me?
You’re not off-topic, Luchadora! I think it’s very important to talk about where the line is between opinion and slander, because we as consumers have to feel free to voice our opinions on this site (and we should do it fearlessly, without worrying about WFM or Monsanto).
No, Whole Foods didn’t write me a letter, and they won’t, because I haven’t written anything that can’t be chalked up to (a) pure truth, (b) parody, or (c) my informed opinion as commentator on the natural foods industry.
Slander and libel, on the other hand, are negative attacks that usually imply a lie, or at least, attacks that are passed off as truth when the slanderer knows they’ll have a negative impact. No one has slandered anyone on this site, to my knowledge. I’d delete the post and warn the Food Fighter, if that happened.
So, no, calling John Mackey a douche is not slander. Call him a douche all you want!
(Of course, it could be slander, Luchadora, if you managed to actually convince people that John Mackey is a feminine hygiene product.)
I’m a co-op girl myself, i live down the street from the Seward co-op which puts a whole foods to shame so yea im a co-op girl, and theres a bit of compotition and a bit of, nonono dont say the W word!!! in my house. BUT, we have a reason, beond mackey being a right wing nut job whole foods is not a very nice establishment, I remember last year when they droped all of their farms that were flooded, just said nope we dont want your crops go try to give them to someone else, they put a lot of farmas in trouble because he wouldn’t help them. THERE IS A POINT I dont actually think that boycotting with out a purpase is that bad of a thing in this case because all of the helth nuts and the core shoppers will go to co-ops and bring there money else ware and make the world a bit more local farmer frendly, so point go boycott go shop at the co-ops and the farmers markets and just ignore whole foods
You bring up many excellent points — and, as a co-op boy, many that I share. I’m certainly making my comments as a potential supporter of people shopping elsewhere, someone who would like to see more depth and breadth in the natural foods market — more indie stores supporting farms and other food producers too small for WFM to carry.
But all that’s kind of me (and you) searching for meaning in the boycott. The issue that brought about this this action isn’t really part of the discussion: Mackey’s comments about health care, his careless misuse of his position as CEO, and speaking for others in his position as “leader” of the Whole Foods community. The boycott doesn’t really address that, and if they don’t want to fritter away their considerable, momentary energy, leaders would call for a specific action in this regard. I think demanding a retraction of Mackey’s WSJ statement in order to create a less specifically political environment at WFM and an apology to his shoppers would make boycotters realize they are doing this for a purpose and not just taking swings at the big WFM pinata.
The day I learned of the Mackey Op Ed piece—from a very fine blog, I might add–I walked into my local Whole Foods, spoke to the the manager, and let her know that until John Mackey retracted his Op-Ed piece in the Wall Street Journal, I would shop elsewhere. I was polite. I was kind. And then I left. I also left a similar message on his Whole Foods blog.
I gave no specifics on what I meant by retraction…I decided it didn’t really matter. But what I meant, was this: John Mackey should write an Op-Ed piece saying that while he still stands by his views (in which he is perfectly entitled)–knowing that Whole Foods Market has a diverse clientelle and many differing political views–it probably would have been best to keep his comments anonymous or to distance himself from Whole Foods by saying that he was writing the Op Ed piece as a concerned citizen and not as CEO.
Healthcare–in its many forms–is a hot button topic for many…myself included. I want reform. If it was the CEO of Target, I would have taken the same action. And for me, it’s not about debating the right or the left or making a big deal about it by holding up signs in front of their store (although a perfect option for some), witholding my dollar is the perfect way to say that while I respect differing views, if you are going to wave yours in front of my face, I have the right to take my dollars elsewhere. It is my way of voting with my pocketbook. It is in the little actions of many (and many starts with one), that whole worlds are changed.
Timothy M.
I just wrote something similar to the poster above without reading yours first. Wish I had because I think you’re exactly, dead-center right, Tim. I do respecting boycotting, and individual boycotters in this action, but a clear statement of purpose like yours is exactly what’s needed to put that individual action perspective.”I’m boycotting until Mackey listens to me and acts accordingly.” That’s it. Perfect.
Well done, and thanks for popping by and popping off, man. Your thoughtful comments are greatly appreciated as always.
Thanks, Barth.
Thanks for the insightful original post, El Dragon. I am completely in agreement with your point about boycotts needing a specific point of victory that can be accomplished by the company being boycotted. Boycotts are a tactic, and a very powerful one. Unfortunately boycotts often get mistaken for a lifestyle, which waters down the effectiveness of an actual boycott.
Do I boycott Whole Foods, or do I, as a consumer, choose to never shop there because:
a. John Mackey is a jerk
b. They create an image that healthful foods have to be expensive, hurting the entire industry
c. They create an image of organic and local when they sell very little that meets these qualifications
d. They brag about putting co-ops out of business
e. They do nothing, zip, zero, nadasikidoodoo to support/address justice in agriculture
f. your WF pet peeve here.
I say, keep not shopping at Whole Foods. And, while your saving time not shopping at Whole Foods, read Saul Alinski on boycotts.
PS – is there a way to add the accent over the o in El Dragon?