Have you heard? In an attempt to minimize the use of artificial ingredients, Starbucks is using crushed up insects rather than dyes to give their Strawberry Frappuccino’s a pink color. What really “bugs” me about these articles isn’t the idea of insects in my frapp, but the media’s willingness to defend this method of coloring. I think it is great that they point out the already wide use of these insects in other food products and the FDA’s approval of it. But why is the media suddenly so willing to defend bugs in our food when they have written countless articles vilifying agricultural products such as high fructose corn syrup, GMO’s, and most recently lean finely textured beef?
The article’s statements about the current use of these insects and the FDA considering it safe were placed in the article to prevent Starbucks’ customers from becoming alarmed and reducing their purchases of this product. Those two statements apply to all three of the previously mentioned agricultural products… so why isn’t the media trying to protect the agriculture industry like they are Starbucks? In fact, without agriculture, Starbucks would have no ingredients to make their drinks and bakery items with.
The way the media chooses to report a story has a HUGE impact on consumer perception. Have we really become more willing to defend our caffeine source than the food on our table? Comment with your thoughts, I’m interested to hear what others think about this.
Illinois State University Student