aardvark66 at GMAIL.COM
Mon Jan 30 18:13:30 UTC 2012
Giving something a name can help to destroy its marketability. I am not
sure who came up with the name "pink slime" but it does not appear to be
the trademark of the product (ammoniated beef trimmings). As late as
2009, NYT failed to use the term in its article on the subject.
There is a possibly interesting turn of phrase in that article:
> "Several packers have unofficially raised concern regarding the use of
> the product since the perception of quality is inferior," the 2002
> memo said. "But will use product to obtain lower bid."
["Inferior" modifies "perception" rather than "quality"--at least, this
is what I see. It could fixed by replacing "is" with "as", but that
opens another can of worms.]
As for "pink slime",
> McDonald's said this week that it was no longer using the
> controversial ground beef additive known as "pink slime" in its
> hamburger recipe. Taco Bell and Burger King have also reportedly
> repudiated the "slime," which consists of spare beef trimmings that
> have been treated with ammonium hydroxide to make them safe and at
> least semi-palatable.
> The move came after "Food Revolution" and "Naked Chef" star Jamie
> Oliver made public calls for chains to abandon the "slime," which has
> been manufactured by Beef Products Inc since 2001. Some are pointing
> to his advocacy as a central factor behind McDonald's decision.
> Even if Oliver was the most prominent critic of "pink slime," though,
> he wasn't alone. The /New York Times/ raised serious doubts about
> "pink slime" in a 2009 investigation of the product. It was also
> criticized in the 2010 documentary "Food Inc."
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
More information about the Ads-l