Sunday, June 06, 2004


not that i'm a crank or anything

maybe i should entitle this post ". . or how i strive to engage with the new york times." because today's thumb-sucking article in the ny times on fair-trade coffee just had me laughing the portafilter off carlos, my expobar.

that this piece, which made no effort to discuss the arguments for or against the fair-trade economic idea, but pondered only guilt and "consumer ethics," appeared at all was perhaps hilarious.

i mean, after all that's happened, the times has the noive as we say in brownstone bklyn to devote an entire magazine to ethics! that's chutzpah!

to use the pidgin of noo yawk, which i am firmly convinced will soon evolve into a rich creole of charmingly decrepit neapolitan italian, yiddish, urdu, and spanglish.

being the times, it can't help but sweetly, arrogantly, get-it-all-wrong-while-missing-the-point. poor paul rice.

long-time readers know that both kimberly easson and paul rice of transfair are long-time friends of this page, even as we here at bccy admit the current fair-trade implementation could be even more successful after some reform.

the times' think piece -- that's too kind to it, i know, but i do so seem to enjoy the struggle of attempting to still respect my fishwrap -- concludes that if fair-trade coffee sales continue to grow, it will be because lazy americans see it as an easy way to believe they are doing good.

the vanity of philanthropy, let's call it.

i know the times disdains normal people of any political persuasion; i know "the institution" -- the times recently admitted few actual human being appear to work there; it's just a "system," albeit one that appears to need a reboot and an upgrade to os x -- disdains those of us stupid enough to still buy it.

but there are great people at the times, who understand issues, write well, and deal seriously with their subject areas.

since my circle of knowledge is quite small (you know, bccy) i can judge only from that perspective. thus i understand that for every dopey amanda hesser there's an unheralded gem, a deborah baldwin.

these good journalists are whomped by the time's culture of touting smug "we-know-it-last!- but-since-we-never-heard-of-it- how-could-you-poor-benighted-in-the-boroughs-have-heard- of-it-at-all?" idiocy as wisdom and expertise. they are really in the same boat as we readers, who have long accepted this insult as our due.

after all, it's the times! the journal of record!

but i'm not some pontificating just-add-hot-air pundit or political war blogger. everyone knows i'm another tiny worm in a container-load of nestle's grade 8.

no, what i find most comic about this coffee piece is its proud laziness, its light-weight refusal to take the subject seriously.

"the world-market price of coffee has fallen so low that, according to a non-profit called transfairusa, millions of third-world farmers are being crushed by unfair competition and cannot survive."

those readers who stop be here even on rare occasion can't help but be floored by that sentence.

the times has never apparently heard of the coffee crisis (and here), despite many mainstream articles on it, including one 2 years ago in the wall st. journal, of all places!

the times apparently cannot bother to discover or explain what transfair is, or its connection to the issue!

the times apparently cannot bother to take a look at its own market and financial reporting to discover the price of coffee, and its trends, over the past few years!

the times apparently is unaware of the series earlier this year on its own editorial pages on the "unfair harvest," or how first-world economic and agricultural policies disadvantage third-world farmers. (for example, here.)

the times apparently cannot be bothered to do any independent research to supply facts about the world's second most-traded commodity, which would allow it to do more than vaguely float "millions of farmers" but rather concretely note "25 million families," or about 70 million people, in 50 coffee-producing countries.

as a prominent green coffee broker (a.k.a "greenie") and former scaa president famously remarked to me: the world runs on coffee just as it does on oil.

but ssh! don't let on that we know. allow the times to discover that for itself. . .

stridency is really unappealing in a yoga student, so let me note that my actual emotion is more a resigned dismay in the face of absurdity. i hope the times does better next time.

and in that mood, i'm going off to have an americano made of the batdorf dancing goats espresso.

not only is this a fantastic tasting, caramel delight, but batdorf is a company committed to doing the right thing by both consumers and coffee farmers.

their pioneering efforts on relationship coffee and sustainability issues are well known.

so while the times scorns us consumers for "buying ourselves ethics," i can say that batdorf, like many scaa members, actually has a better understanding.

we specialty coffee lovers are caught with the farmers and roasters in a chain, an illogical commodity system for coffee that shouldn't exist, that is structured to work against us.

but our choices can disrupt and end this system, by demanding and purchasing better-quality specialty coffee, sustainable coffee, and yes, if you like it, fair-trade coffee.

farmers and consumers are actually in control of the trade, if we would act. we don't have to hang about and let the market eat us all for lunch.

scaa roasters like batdorf understand that the current system isn't sustainable. thus they act in their own self-interest by partnering with farmers and consumers alike.

you can purchase fresh, delicious, premium coffee from your local specialty roaster and do everyone a favor. that's positive action, not warding off guilt.

or if the plight -- and that's not too strong a word -- of 70 million people attracts even your brief attention, you can also support that excellent charity, coffeekids. i do.

posted by fortune | 9:31 AM | top | link to this | email this: | | | 0 comments