But, looking at the bottle, there isnt exactly a lot of information about where this is from and what is in it. While it is true the back of the bottle actually has a map showing where it is from and I can make my way through the excellent a href=http://kermitlynch.com/Kermit Lynch Wine Merchent website/a (http://kermitlynch.com/) to find info about what is in this wine. But the fact is, not only does that require me to actually put aside the wine, go to my computer (KLWM website built on flash so It doesnt work on an iPhone or iPad) and remember what I am looking for, but the KLWM site doesnt actually tell you what is in this wine. It does tell you some great trivia about the family making the wine but I still want to know what is in this wine!

So, I go to the Italian website. And, low and behold, the wine is made from Corvino. According to Wikipedia, Corvino is also Corvina and used in Italy to produce a light to medium body wine with light crimson color.

OK, so I think this is great and I am glad to know this info. But, I gotta ask, if KLWM can make its own label and but its logo on the back of the bottle, why not the KLWM webiste URL and a QR Code I can use with my phone to go directly to a page about the wine? After all, if I had been anywhere but at home, Igettig this info would have been almost impossible since I would not have remembered to do all of this research later.

br /br /a href=http://foodfortherestofus.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/20120131-100408.jpgimg src=http://foodfortherestofus.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/20120131-100408.jpg alt=20120131-100408.jpg class=alignnone size-full //a

Odds are you have. Even if you are a non-capable, nearly hulu only tv viewing person such as I, the odds are that you have seen some sort of clip or video of yiayia calling a stay at home dad a wife or telling a young unmarried couple they are “going to hell” on TV, the web or even the YouTube channel yiatube.

According to the Wall Street Journal, these adds are a part of Kraft’s new approach to marketing that includes the company aggressively adopting and incorporating social media into it’s new campaigns.

So, how is it working? Well, good ol yiayia has more than 150,000 Facebook friends and her own YouTube channel with close to three million uploads. And its not limited to yiayia either. According to the WSJ, Kraft discovered that twitter postings about Mac &Cheese numbered in the thousands some days. So, Kraft capitalized on this popularity by building a contest out of it.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304450604576416051591186240.html?KEYWORDS=Kraft+spiffs+up+it%27s+old+brands

The question that comes to my mind is this: if it works for craft, why couldn’t his work for you?

All Kraft is doing is using social media to help spread the word or tell a unique story while engaging a huge audience.

Basically, they either created a unique story or recognized how they are already being perceived and then used social media as a vehicle to get the word out and tell more people.

While I am not saying you should go out and run a twitter contest or build a YouTube channel, I am saying that if you take the time to talk with you customers to tell them why your food, wine, cheese, spirits (liquor) or what not are unique, maybe it might be good to consider investing just a little bit of time and effort to use social media to help you tell the same story to hundreds or thousands of people at the same time.

The fact is, if you are a completely original, unique or special producer or company and no one knows about you or your uniqueness, in the eyes of your consumer you are not unique or special. People love uniqueness and social media thrives when it tells a story that is unique, so if you think you are unique, there is much to be gained by using social media.

By being a small local food business, you are already unique, so why not see if you can make this work for you. After all, if a multinational food company can use social media to make themselves look unique, and it works for them, and you are already unique, why couldn’t it work for you?

Basically, the idea is restricting the quantity of starches being served in school lunches will force a greater selection of vegetables to be offered, and ultimately consumed, as a part of school lunches. “Under the USDA proposal, school cafeterias would have to limit starchy vegetables such as potatoes, corn, peas and lima beans to a total of one cup per week for lunch.”

Truthfully, the state of the nation’s nutrition is a major problem and should be treated as a long term crisis with economic, financial, political and military implications. Since most kids and teenagers eat at least one meal a day in a school cafeteria, there is a logic to the approach of establishing rules and regulations designed to encourage better eating and nutrition in school cafeterias.
But, I am not entirely sold that restricting the quantity of starches being served in school lunches will have the intended result.
First, it is important to remember the nutritional quality the starches being restricted. According to the National Potato Council: “Potatoes deliver a good source (providing at least 10% of DV) of two of the four nutrients of concern for children – potassium and dietary fiber. In fact, according to the DGA 2010, one small baked potato is the #1 source of potassium in the diet, providing 738 mg potassium in just 128 calories, and is listed among the top sources of dietary fiber (3 gm).”
Second, I don’t understand the logic or assumption of restricting the quantity of starches being served resulting in increased consumption of other vegetables. Yes, it is true that restricting the quantity of serving starches will result in other foods being served. But, just because other things are being served does not mean they will be eaten. After all, if you were given the choice between potato foods such as french fries, hashbrowns, tater tots or other similar things and broccoli, asparagus, brussel sprouts or other vegetables, which would you choose if you were eating in a school cafeteria? Based on my memories of cafeteria food and what I know about how we all eat, I don’t think it is a far stretch to think the potato choices will win.
The truth of the matter is that the intention of this effort is good, however, the result of the effort will probably not produce the intended result. Instead of focusing on what is served, why not focus on how it is served? Maybe it might be better to focus on how it is served or consumed? So, instead of getting rid of fried or “oven baked” or “oven fried” foods that are very high in statured fats, why not draft regulations designed to encourage cafeteria foods that are prepared in healthy, low fat ways and consumed without the addition of horrendous toppings such as mounds of sour cream, bacon bits, excessive amounts of cheese, or other “toppings” that are enough to cause a coronary in school kids?

For more on this issue, the National Farm to School Network has put together a very interesting briefing on the proposal and problems with implementing the proposal.

Here is the opening paragraph:

“A recent study conducted in 58 schools nationwide found that children choose flavored milk over unflavored milk nearly 70 percent of the time. And when flavored milk was not an option, milk consumption dropped.”

My immediate response to this: DUH!

Hmmm, lets think about this for a minute. Human beings are naturally and instinctively drawn to fast and “cheap” sources of fuel. Sugar and Fat are two fuels that meet this criteria. So, as a result, we tend to be drawn to foods offering us lots of “cheap” fuel and we tend to need pushing (from parents or that parental side of our minds, a.k.a. rational control) to make sure we eat foods that not as high in fats, sugars or other “cheap” fuels. So, given that children are renown for their ability to rationally control themselves, why isn’t it surprising that children “prefer” flavored milks over unflavored milk?

One of the things that puts this article over the edge is the fact that the whole spin of the study and resulting media outreach is that the study is being used as a justification for having flavored milks stocked and distributed in schools:

“Hopefully, school systems and parents will use information like this when making decisions about the kinds of milk they make available to students,” said Tony Banks, a commodity marketing specialist forVirginia Farm Bureau Federation. “Flavored milk is still milk, with all the nutritional benefits of regular milk, and milk is still among the most nutrient-dense food items available to children in schools.

“Even milk that has additional sugar because it is flavored can be a healthier beverage choice than sodas and some fruit drinks.”

The reasoning is that drinking flavored milk is better than drinking no milk at all. While it is true that flavored waters, soda/pop drinks, and other beverages contain more sugars, sweeteners, artificial flavorings and other “bad” stuff,  I don’t really buy into this argument. To me, it is about the same as saying that since red wine offers some potential health benefits, it is OK to drink red wine instead of eating the fruits and vegetables that offer the same health benefits. The problem is, the benefits offered by red wine or flavored milk are significantly less than the health detriments offered by everything else that is contained in the red wine or the flavored milk. Or, to put it another way, saying it is better to drink flavored milk over no milk at all is about the same as saying it is better to eat fastfood over canned or fresh vegetables. It just doesn’t make sense.

Also, to make one more point that should probably go into another blog, the purpose of the VA Farm Bureau and the Save Our Food sight is to help promote, protect and preserve local farming and food production in Virginia. Wouldn’t it be a better use of money to promote how local milk is  better for kids, the environment and the economy than promoting a type of consumption that is not necessarily good for kids and a product that tends to not come from local farms and is more commonly from larger industrial farms that are frequently out of state, especially when it comes to the foods that are offered in local schools?

Yes, I did ask if you know the history of the potato; and, no, I am not joking. An interesting facet to the history of potatoes is that the history includes

Potatoes did not originate in Europe, Russia or Africa. While a great many of edible tubers do originate from those parts of the world, the potato in all of its many forms, flavors, colors and textures actually originated in South America. Akin to corn, tomatoes, and other present day North American / European kitchen vegitable staples, potatoes were brought back from South America by early explorers. Although these explorers did not have the tools or technology to assess or quantify all of the nutritional values and benefits potatoes can offer, through direct observation of the native peoples’ eating habits and overall health, explorers correctly assessed that potatoes could be an excellent food source for the masses “back in the old country.”

But, despite all of its nutritional values and benefits, potatoes were not exactly an instant hit with those masses. In fact, potatoes initially received staunch resistance and great skepticism by those very masses who were to benefit from eating potatoes. From a branding or communications perspective, potatoes suffered from a significant image or public perception problem. Potatoes were completely new and entirely unknown. Not only did they look strange if not bizzare, but people did not know what or how to prepare them for consumption. When confronted with this strange and bizzare thing, the masses reacted with fear and skepticism, rumoring potatoes to be poisonous among other things, and deeply entrenched resistance to potatoes.

The important question to ask is: what happened? How did the potato go from evil food vilan to much loved and prized food staple?

Persuasion

Or, by other standards, very cunning trickery.

As the story goes, Antoine Augustine Parmentier – a pharmacist, chemist and employee of Louis XV, was came up with a fairly surreptitious way of persuading local French peasants to overcome their resistance to potatoes. Apparently, he planted 50 acres of potatoes just outside of Paris in a poor neighborhood. “During the day, he set a guard over it. This drew considerable attention in the neighborhood. In the evening the guard was relaxed and the locals came to see what all the fuss was about. Believing this plant must be valuable, many peasants “acquired” some of the potatoes from the plot, and soon were growing the root in their own garden plots. Their resistance was overcome by their curiosity and desire to better their lot with the obviously valuable new produce.” (from Potato!- History)

According to Robert B. Cialdini, “Scarcity can not only increase the perceived value of an entity, it can also influence the perceptions of an item (emotional, flavors, intensity, etc.)” and “when increasing scarcity – or anything else- interferes with our prior access to some item, we will react against the interference by waiting and trying to possess the item more than before.” (Robert B. Cialdini, Influence Science and Practice, 4th edition 2001, p. 209).

So, by placing soldiers around the potato fields and restricting access, Parmentier significantly increased the perceived value of the potatoes.

Would such a technique apply today? Yes. Current examples include limited edition bottling of wines or spirits. Other examples include limited availability based on geography, seasonality or specified growing conditions such as certified organic. Simply put, by restricting access, availability or creating exclusivity, perceived value can be added to a product, even if it that product is just a lowly potato.

Each day it becomes easier and easier to record and post video onto any number of social media sites. Not long ago, putting video on the web required special equipment and software. Now, many still and video cameras are designed to post video to the web with the “click of a button.” At the same time, video software such as Apple’s iMovie provides fairly robust editing tools that are easy to use at a very affordable price.

But, just because it is easy to do something, does not mean that it should be done.

When you post something to the web, it then becomes a part of your overall web presence and your “image” or brand. Just as it is not a good idea for gold medal swimmers, college co-eds or law school students to put video, photos, or written comments on the web that may present them in a bad way, you do not want to post things to the web or your website that do not match with how you want your company to be perceived.

Take a look at the videos shown below and note how they portray two entirely different brands or personas.

Artisean Beef

Organic Spirits in Loudon County, VA

Amongst all of the news and scary stories related to the egg recall is an interesting fact regarding the regulation of eggs and their production.

Before July 9, 2010 no one specific federal agency was directly responsible for the monitoring and enforcement of egg safety standards and regulations.

According an August 24, 2010 Wall Street Journal article:

“By law, the FDA oversees the safety of shell eggs. Prior to the new egg-safety rules taking effect, the FDA had authority to inspect egg producers, …, but didn’t have standards by which to enforce cleanliness and other safety-related issues

A spokesman at the USDA said that agency has no legal authority to regulate eggs still in their shells for human consumption. Parts of the USDA inspect eggs for freshness and thickness to determine what quality grade they should be assigned. But those inspectors don’t check for bacteria such as salmonella.”

If that was not scary enough, the article goes on to state:

“Before those rules took effect, ‘if a company was taking short-cuts, it would only become apparent if there was illness involved or if there was an audit performed by the FDA.’ Said Richard Raymond, former USDA undersecretary for food safety. Mr. Raymond compared the prior FDA regulations for shell eggs to a highway speed limit: ‘It’s only illegal when you get caught.’”

To read the full article, please click here or paste the following in your browser: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704340504575447951284839386.html

While one could argue the practice of manually synchronizing the phone and computer is a good idea and can help protect against accidental loss of data, the time and frustration associated with this daily ritual is something this client could live without.

So, while discussing the options of how to best work around and resolve the situation to my client’s benefit I mentioned the possibility of taking advantage of some cloud computing options. He responded by asking “what is cloud computing.”

Simply put, cloud computing stores data onto a server or servers connected to a network such as the internet or a company’s intranet. You connect to this data however you would normally connect to the internet or your company’s intranet. The concept of the cloud comes from the fact that you are not directly connected or tethered to a server or other computer. Instead, your indirect connection is to the network / internet, giving you access to all of the data servers or other resources also connected to the network, creating the cloud.

Today’s WSJ features an excellent summary article covering cloud computing by Walt Mossberg. Here is a link to the article and its companion web video.

It seems many people see buying organic / local foods is something done by others. What “others” is, I have no clue. But, I imagine it is entirely based on perceptions and stereo types such as: young hipsters, DINKS, “smarter” or “prettier”, urban-over educated, liberal loving and nearly socialist, Pruis or not American made/truck drivers, and other completely superficial and baseless things.

While there is probably a grain of truth to all of those stereotypes, the facts paint an entirely different picture.

According to a recent posting at Save Our Food, the USDA’s 2008 Organic Production Survey reports Virginia’s 180 certified or exempt organic farms occupied a total of 12,308 acres with 5,884 acres used for harvested cropland and 5,164 acres used for pastureland.

For the people owning, working on, and working with those 180 certified or exempt organic farms, ”40 percent of Virginia organic sales took place within 100 miles of the farm; nearly half took place within 500 miles of the farm.”

I gotta repeat this:

Half of the sales for the food from those 180 farms happens within 500 miles, a day’s drive, of those farms.

And;

“40 percent of Virginia organic sales took place within 100 miles of the farm…”

So, what does this mean?

It means that when you make an effort to buy organic and/or local foods, you are giving your dollars to your neighbors!

Still think rganic or local farming is something reserved for “them”?

Remember:

Local farming is “… as personal as your NEXT MEAL.”

P.S. The Virginia Farm Bureau’s website www.SaveOurFood.org is a great resource for information about farming in Virginia as well as finding local farmers, farmer’s markets, and CSA’s where you can receive locally produced food.

Grilin'

Guys like to Grill because it isn’t cooking

How many guys do you know (including yourself) who “don’t cook” but are the Grill Master at home, amongst friends or even the neighborhood?

But……

Isn’t the most basic and fundamental element to cooking the process of applying heat to food in order to alter some aspect of the food’s taste, texture or color in order to make it edible, or at least more edible?

So, isn’t grilling or bar-b-queing cooking?

Yes.

So why claim not to cook and then profess a passion for cooking by another name?

In a word, perception.

Even with massive media presence of celebrety chefs such as Bobby Flay and Emeril, the act and concept of cooking remains closely associated with maternal or feminine roles such as nuturing and caring for the family.

Meanwhile, grilling and bar-b-que are associated with images and concepts related to “the hunt”, survival, and the outdoors.

Don’t believe me? Compare the images of Rachel Ray and the Barefoot Contessa vs Bobby Flay and Guy Fierri.

Adding fuel to the fire, is how cooking is portrayed as difficult, time consuming, and something enjoyed only by the “elites” – those with time, money and/or “culture”. So now, not only is cooking perceived as feminine, it is also difficult, time consuming, elite-ist.

In summary:

cooking = woman, nurture, care, work, tedium, NOT FUN.

grilling/bar-b-que = man, hunt, survival, not work, FUN, cool (not literally),

Hmmmm, which one looks (will be perceived) as fun, not feminine, something a man/father will enjoy, and will be accepted and approved by other men?

Now, how does this relate to social media?

Perception – how a thing is perceived governs how how treat it.

If have something you want people to notice and engage with, try to be your audience’s concept of bar-b-que/grilling and not their perception of cooking.

Use social media to talk with and listen to your audience. Listen to their likes, dislikes, rants and raves. Talk with them on a person to person level, telling the story, details, etc of you, your product, company or vision. Most importantly, make sure you are letting them hear how and why you are grilling and not cooking as if they were saying to themselves.