Defiant Imagination

Archive
July, 2009 Monthly archive

Wal-Mart’s eco-labels: brilliant or evil?

Wal-Mart announced today the launching of an eco-labelling program that will allow customers to see the environmental footprint of the products they wish to buy. In collaboration with a consortium of universities, the giant retailer will work on issuing an index that will reflect the life cycles of its products.

The news seems to have been perceived as positive among the media and the public.

Photo by code poet. Some rights reserved (Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike license.)

Photo by code poet. Some rights reserved (Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike license.)

“Wal-Mart had been the company that the left loved to hate, because it seemed to have too much power and to use it in non socially constructive ways, squeezing suppliers or keeping wages down,” wrote Rosabeth Moss Kanter on Bloomberg.com. “Today Wal-Mart reminds us that a new kind of capitalism is possible in which big companies can use their power constructively, for the good of society and to move on issues that are still largely unaddressed by government.”

Am I the only one to be skeptical? It’s not because Wal-Mart goes green that it should be hailed as a model for a new capitalism. In my opinion, Wal-Mart is still hurting local economies as well as the urban fabric, and the eco-labelling program will not necessarily improve the food industry’s ethics. Even if we know that the food industry has some serious issues to address, we seem to keep our focus on the environmental side. The organic and local movements are so strong right now that it sometimes seems that it’s all that matters. In fact, going organic or making sure that the food was produced in an environmentally-friendly way might not be enough to improve the global food situation.

“Even if you stick an organic label on Walmart, the system remains the same,” wrote Dorothy Woodend in a review of the documentary Food Inc. in The Tyee. ” The same distribution chains, the same scale of practice, the same billions upon billions of Stonyfield plastic yogurt containers shipped around the country, all so that people can buy more shit with a clean conscience.”

When will we be ready to truly change our habits instead of reading a label for a second?

Media literacy in the digital age

As a journalist, I often get asked whether the proliferation of news sources online (newspapers’ websites, blogs, aggregators…)  is indeed harming journalism. It will certainly take a while for news organizations to figure out a new business model and for other structures to be put in place to create a balance between traditional reporting, citizen journalism and commentary, and the economic crisis hasn’t helped. Over the next couple of years there will be less reporting done, fewer articles written, fewer important issues covered, but in the long term, I’m convinced that journalism, however different it might become, will thrive again.

What has to change, however, is our attitude toward the different sources that feed us information. In the old age of broadcast and print journalism, it was easy to remain passive and take for granted what we heard or read, because these institutions built their credibility on a history of highly-regulated and structured reporting. But now that we are overwhelmed by the amount of information we’re receiving, we’re going to have to be much smarter at sorting this information out and take from it what we need.

“In 2009 literacy isn’t about finishing a book or slogging through 12 web pages to get to the end of an article. It is about knowing what to do with information, how to find the good stuff, how to assess sources. What matters is not that we are readers, but that we are critical readers,” writes Utne Reader’s librarian Danielle Maestretti in the magazine’s July-August 2009 issue.

Whereas the journalism industry will probably regulate itself naturally, media literacy cannot be achieved without effort and education.