General Mills says that Cheerios will no longer include ingredients made from genetically modified plants.
Some anti-GMO activists are praising the move, which also includes labeling boxes of the company's flagship cereal as GMO-free. But whichever side of the GMO debate you're on, you should see the General Mills campaign for what it is: an elegant piece of corporate doublespeak that's completely devoid of substance.
In a blog post, General Mills' vice president of global communications Tom Forsyth writes that Cheerios haven't changed that much, despite the new labeling. Oats are the main ingredient in Cheerios, and Forsyth points out that genetically modified oats don't even exist. What's changed, he says, is that the small amounts of corn starch and sugar in Cheerios will no longer come from genetically modified crops.
"Why change anything at all?" Forsyth writes. "It’s simple. We did it because we think consumers may embrace it."
That may be true, but it's hardly a bold stance. Yes, wariness of GMOs as food remains strong, even as such crops have become a staple of U.S. agriculture over the past two decades. An overwhelming majority of respondents to a New York Times poll this summer, for instance, said they supported the labeling of products containing genetically modified ingredients. But General Mills isn't suddenly against GMOs. It's simply exploiting consumer fears to sell more cereal.
In fact, the company's new campaign only applies to original Cheerios. Those Honey Nut Cheerios your kids prefer? Those may still be made with mutant sugar.
Forsyth does point out that General Mills offers many other non-GMO choices, but then he adds that GMOs aren't actually a problem. "It’s not about safety," he says. "Biotech seeds, also known as genetically modified seeds, have been approved by global food safety agencies and widely used by farmers in global food crops for almost 20 years."
And just to cover all the bases, he confirms that the $30 billion industrial food giant is moving forward while staying exactly where it was. "It was never about pressure. In fact, General Mills’ position on GMOs hasn’t changed."
That position offers a full-throated defense of GMOs as better for the environment and global food security. If General Mills were really serious about curtailing GMOs, which it already says it's not, the company would drop them from products made mainly from corn and soy, two of the country's leading genetically modified crops. Cheerios were an easy, visible product to use for a token anti-GMO gesture because, as General Mills says, the main ingredient was never made from GMOs anyway. If you're against GMOs, buying more Cheerios now is hardly striking a blow for the cause.
If you support GMOs, you should hardly be placated by the company's assurance that it's still on your side. Pulling GMOs from Cheerios, an iconic American brand, is a public relations victory for the anti-GMO side. Whatever General Mills says, the decision gives the appearance of the company caving to pressure from anti-GMO activists, which will embolden them to push harder. From the pro-GMO point of view, propaganda wins and science loses.
Regardless of how hollow its move is, however, we can't help but admire General Mills for its shrewdness. Since the company doesn't have to change the sourcing of Cheerios' main ingredient, the cost of going GMO-free is relatively low. At the same time, it gains a whole new potential market of customers who try to shun GMOs in their groceries. Meanwhile, every other shopper who didn't care whether Cheerios had GMOs in the first place won't care now that they don't. Their habits won't change. As a marketing move, pulling GMOs from Cheerios may be exploitative. But it also makes sense.
Bravo, General Mills. You won the day by doing not much at all.
