And she calls the magazine Living.
I have idolized Martha Stewart for most of my life. My mother and I have shared many hours enjoying her recipe books together and even when Martha spent time in prison, I turned a blind eye, believing that she had done more good than harm in the world – particularly for women. More valuable than anything else she accomplished was re-acquainting us with our households, our kitchens, gardens and time honored traditions and crafts.
Over the last two weeks I’ve challenged myself again to turn the other cheek, when MSL Omnimedia engaged a fellow Austin blogger in a legal kerfuffle over the name of her website, alleging copyright infringement. The claim is weak, unnecessary and ultimately, garden variety cyberbullying.
Today, upon seeing THIS ad in the June issue of Living, I find the for the first time I’m able to perceive Martha as a mortal. The pedestal is gone.
Noting my ire, a friend raised the question, “How can you be sure she [Martha] is even aware of what ads her staff are running?” I can take the ‘busy’ argument, believe me, but I can’t stomach the founder of a media empire turning a blind eye to an issue facing every adult and child in our country: diet-related disease.
As anyone can see by simply visiting the Wikipedia page on HFCS, this product is hotly debated; its benefits and detrimental effects, rabidly contested by trade orgs such as CRA and ABA.
Many bloggers have covered the TV ads which launched in Sept. 2008. This new wave of print is insidious, and like the McCafe campaign featuring smiling latinas, targets women with misleading claims wrapped with a bow.
To see all variants of the campaign and read the copy – all of which, is naturally endorsed by “experts in their fields”, click here. Peppering the website are soundbites and quotations pulled out of context, such as that from the American Medical Association, which fails to include the next sentence from its official findings published in 2008 stating that further INDEPENDENT research was recommended on the health effects of HFCS.
Thank you, Cake, for pointing this out and for taking a stand. While the ship of federal food policy that subsidizes fats and sugars will definitely and expectedly be slow to turn, we should expect more from our cultural captains – especially those who don’t just respond to trends, but help create them. The ad campaign around HFCS is certainly misleading, and this endorsement – affected by having accepted the advertising dollars – by an icon of wholesome homekeeping is either an abominable accident or an egregious betrayal. Thank you again, Cake, and keep up the great work.
That ad is just laughable — as the TV is as well. I agree that we should be voting with our feet and applaud you for writing this post. Great seeing you last night at book club as well!