Ben & Jerry's Cloning Hoax Backfires

Ben & Jerry's lied and I'm pretty *issed about it. The company's owners -- I assume their names are Ben and Jerry -- or does the company lie about that, too? -- created a fake website that promotes cloned milk, in a deceptive attempt to discourage people from buying milk from cloned cows.

The ice cream folks intended to reveal the truth about CycloneDairy.com on April Fool's Day, or so they say. We'll never know the truth because bloggers William K. Wolfrum and Vance Lehmkuhl outed the hoax earlier this week through good sleuthing.

Today the Cyclone Dairy homepage says: "Just kidding about Cyclone Dairy. NOT kidding about clones in our food."

Yesterday, the Cyclone Dairy site baited readers with a bogus FAQ designed to ignite the anti-cloning crowd:

Q. Are there any ethical issues about cloning?

A. No.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not for cloning cows. But to scare monger by creating a realistic-looking website sponsored by a supposed cloned-milk dairy is a sophomoric way to influence the conversation. Ben & Jerry's called it a "joke" and said they were just "testing the waters." But very little about CycloneDairy.com looked like satire. And by not being genuinely funny, the site failed to attract much attention, certainly not enough to test the waters. (Note to Ben & Jerry's creative team: writing comedy is a lot harder than it looks. The Daily Show just makes it look easy.)

Why do I care about this? I've said it before: with newspapers going the way of the buggy whip, journalism is migrating to the internet and it's important readers can trust what they read -- at the very least from companies like Ben & Jerry's who brag about having more soul than the average manufacturer.

For more on Ben & Jerry's crazy cloned food crusade, read this. To read the Sept. 2008 PETA letter asking Ben and Jerry's to please use human breast milk in their products, read this, if only to prove I didn't make it up.

To read about Wolfrum's juicier internet detective work, read this, this, and this. If we're going to clone anything, we ought to clone Wolfrum.

Comments

[docgirl0425]

What an udderly (ouch! sorry) silly hoax, but then, as mentioned, hoaxes are intended to be just that. I fear that this very discussion gave it much more attention than it deserved, but the comments have been interesting. :-)

[Diane Tucker - Huffpost Blogger]

Hey, there's no such thing as too corny on this site.

I suppose you're right, though: we should be discussing the pros and cons of food from cloned animals. Here's a helpful link:

http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Cloned+foods%22+facts&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

[AngryNYDemocrat]

I always thought that pranks like this were a big part of ben & jerry's schtick. You're probably too young to remember (and this will date me), but in the 1980s they were known for their political pranks-- peace pops, rainforest crunch, a bunch of others. This is what I used to like about them. I too am surprised that unilever would do this, but i guess i am 'good surprised' considering that how bland or right wing or humorless these multinational corporations normally are.

[Diane Tucker - Huffpost Blogger]

Too young to remember the 80s? It's official: you're my favorite reader. Truth be told, I'm too old to remember the 80s.

Why are you an angry NY dem? Spitzer?

[AngryNYDemocrat]

Isn't the point of a hoax that it's realistic enough to fool at least some people? And how is this hoax not attracting attention for the anti-cloning cause, if it just made the Huffington Post?

[Diane Tucker - Huffpost Blogger]

"Isn't the point to fool at least some of the people?"

Absolutely! But Ben & Jerry's? I thought that brand was above subterfuge. I've got to quit being such a Pollyanna.

Besides, why can't they be upfront when discussing cloned foods and the fight to label them as such? Are we heading into a new era of viral marketing? Sigh.

[maggiq]

To the best of my knowledge, Ben and Jerry's sold their ice cream company a few years back. I don't know who bought it, but this incident is diametrically opposed to everything that Ben and Jerry stood for in their integrity about food. It is disappointing to hear that some company would besmirch the good name of people who spent years developing a product and philosophy that was so very honorable and socially conscious.

[Diane Tucker - Huffpost Blogger]

Hi Maggiq,

That's right, Ben and Jerry sold (out?) to Unilever in 2000. Here's a snippet of conversation between Jerry Greenfield and Guardian reporter Hannah Pool in July, 2008:

Hannah Pool: "But people are buying into the brand because they think it is just you and Ben when, really, you are owned by a multinational. Isn't there a danger that you have become Unilever's social conscience, that you make it look good -- ie, socially responsible?"

Jerry Greenfield: I guess that I hope Unilever and other companies will see that the way Ben & Jerry's has operated has been very successful for the company.

(Link to the full interview: http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/jul/31/5)

Hopefully, Unilever will think twice before creating more phony websites that besmirch the Ben & Jerry's brand.

Thanks for reading!