Most Recent Campaign Headlines
Five years after Starbucks kicked off an annual competition to improve their cup design it shut the competition down, went on using the unrecyclable cups, and adopted the line that the world's taxpayers should foot the bill for upgrading recycling plants to accommodate its cups.
Consumers have wised up to the evils of GMO foods. But Monsanto’s GMOs aren’t just in our foods. Only about 20 percent of all GMO crops in the U.S. are used to make (junk) food for humans—the other 80 percent go into animal feed, ethanol and cotton. Globally, the overwhelming majority of all cotton, much of it used to make cheap clothes, is GMO.
About two months ago, things started going south, staff say. Many pin the blame on cutbacks in working hours.
Starbucks has a bigger problem than the controversy over its new red holiday cup. It's still buying palm oil and other agricultural products that might be linked to tropical forest destruction, and a coalition of science, environmental and labor organizations isn't happy about it.
Today that coalition sent a letter to Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz (above) urging him to strengthen his company's procurement policy to ensure it doesn't contribute to deforestation, a significant cause of global warming. The commodities in question include wood, paper products and palm oil, an ingredient in a number of Starbucks menu items, including its Java Chip Frappuccino and Cranberry Bliss Bar.
Though this immensely popular coffee chain often tries to blend in with the health crowd, pretending to be environmentally and nutritionally conscious, the Starbucks Coffee Company is an active member of a food organization fighting to keep you and your family in the dark about genetically modified organisms (GMOs).
It's true -- Starbucks is a dues-paying member of the Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA), which is currently trying to sue the state of Vermont for passing a law that requires GMOs to be properly labeled.
Starbucks is taking a lot of heat from consumers lately.
Multiple organizations, including OCA, have appealed to CEO Howard Schultz to switch to organic milk.
And recently, hundreds of thousands of consumers signed petitions, including ours, demanding Starbucks drop out of the Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA), a lobbying group that is suing Vermont to overturn its GMO labeling law.
It’s no wonder Starbucks is looking for ways to polish its image. And it found one. Problem is, it doesn't address the real issues.
Singer/songwriter Neil Young recently struck a sour note with Starbucks when he wrote that he’d waited in line for his last cup of Joe imprinted with the famous mermaid logo.
It seems Young learned that Starbucks is a member of the Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA), the multi-billion-dollar lobbying group that is suing to overturn Vermont’s GMO labeling law.
Starbucks took offense, claiming that Young, and the boycott petition he signed, were wrong. When that wasn’t enough to cool the media attention, the GMA chimed in: "Neither Starbucks nor Monsanto is participating in our lawsuit to overturn Vermont's GMO labeling law."
Nice try. Fact is, corporations join lobbying groups like the GMA so they can maintain a consumer-friendly image while the lobbying group does the dirty work for them. Case in point: When Washington State sued the GMA for money laundering, the GMA defended its creation of the “Defense of Brand Strategic Account” to “better shield individual companies from attack,” by claiming that the lobbying group speaks “with one voice” for its members.
The legendary rocker announced that he's boycotting Starbucks over the coffee monolith's alleged involvement in a lawsuit in Vermont regarding the labeling of genetically modified ingredients.
- Page 1
- ››
SIGN UP FOR NEWS & ALERTS
Get Local
Cool the planet.
Feed the world.