596
Campbell’s Soup VP mocks ‘poor people’ who buy its food in secret recording (www.newsweek.com)
submitted 8 months ago by to c/nottheonion@lemmy.world
95 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -5 points 8 months ago (4 children)

"Who buys our s**t? I don’t buy Campbell’s products barely anymore. It’s not healthy now that I know what the f**‘s in it."

Maybe, I dunno, make it more healthful?

(English pedant peeve: food is not “healthy” or unhealthy; it’s healthful or unhealthful. Living things are healthy, nutrients are healthful. A state of health versus a beneficial quality.)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 24 points 8 months ago* (1 child)

    Technically correct, but actual usage has made "healthy" synonymous with "healthful" as well as far more commonly used. The distinction was pretty useless, anyway. A "who/whom" situation.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 15 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

    Obligatory “technically correct, the best kind of correct”

    That’s how English works. It’s usage. I think the French have a council that decides but English moves a lot faster.

    I get having a pet peeve. I for one hate that ignorant means uneducated when it should be someone who is willfully ignoring. That’s just not the way it played out.

    I love dictionaries and word usage. “Healthful” is a clunky word, I’m not surprised we moved to “healthy “

    Edit: I just realized “helpful” sounds just fine. But if someone said to me “thanks for being so helpy today” I would be a full of seething hatred lol

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 12 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    "Healthy" has always been an actual word, while "helpy" hasn't, so no wonder it's grating!

    I'm all for language changing when it makes sense. I can't think of any situation where using "healthy" instead of "healthful" obfuscates the meaning in any way. Same with "who" and "whom." "Whom" and "healthful" could disappear and nothing of value would be lost. But when it comes to things like "literally" meaning "figuratively," I mourn the loss of utility the word used to have.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 8 months ago

    Oh and it literally worries me when people use one word to mean the exact opposite. That isn’t advancement it’s degradation.

    And ten points to grifendor for the word “obfuscate “ it’s one of my favorites.

    Sorry for the tripple reply. This is one of the things I get excited about.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Knock knock

    Who’s there

    To

    To who?

    It’s to whom actually.

    Yes as long as what you’re saying makes sense that’s all that matters. Language is just the sound you make to communicate the idea in your head to someone else.

    The opposite tho is names. I’m Michael. Not Mike. It doesn’t offended me to be called Mike but that’s not the sound your face needs to make to get my attention. It’s a different sound.

    But for just talking… “I stop speak right but you can hold it, then where’s the rub?”

    I actually would play around by calling “money” different things. See how weird I could get. “Bucks” fine. Doodlyfranks? In context it works just fine. You can call money anything. Since fallout I regularly say “I’m short on caps” no one’s ever questioned it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 8 months ago* (1 child)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago

    Excellent example of how names work. It’s not about if I’m annoyed or not. If you want to get my attention you have to flap your meat together and blow air thru it this way (the meat people story if you haven’t heard that. It’s great)

    I reply with classical works of the philosopher Monty python

    “Is you wife a goer, know what I mean, I bet she does I bet she does”

    Language has always fascinated me. Clown too. Not party but the ones who don’t talk but communicate ideas thru body language and face make up. Yes the makeup serves a practical communicative purpose.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    French moves just as quickly. The Académie Française exists to make sure the French you learn in school doesn't keep up.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    I only heard about it because of an article about them trying to find a French word for “e-mail”

    Did that become of thing? Did it catch on?

    I’m curious because in English once something has a “name” it never changes. Hell Donald trump tried to rename the Gulf of Mexico. I’m in Texas, no one is changing the name. It’s the Gulf of Mexico.

    Once something is established it doesn’t change.

    Did they change email into something more French? Does that work like that?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 8 months ago

    Yeah, I honestly expected it to be worse. Yeah, the dude says Campbell's for poor people. I'm not poor, but Campbell's Chicken Noodle has always been a comfort food for when I'm sick. Putting it aside, it is supposed to be food for people on budgets, that's the whole idea.

    And then he goes on to say that their product is shit. I don't necessarily think that's a bad thing, if you're saying it with the idea that maybe the product should get unucked, which I can't tell from the limited passages and my near-midnight cognition.

    The part about fucking Indians, obviously racist, but I'm also not sure what it means. Being from the US, it feels to me like Campbell's outsourced production or some service to India and is reaping what they sowed, so to speak, with decline in product quality?

    Perhaps it's an awakening for Campbell's soup, and with a shithead VP's tirade comes a rebirth of cheap soup for the non-rich (which will be all of us soon enough).

    I also think the canned goods market in general just isn't what it was when it was first introduced. We had nonperishable goods in a can. We've replaced the need for the nonperishables with access to fresh foods (yes, I understand not for everyone), and canned goods have taken a hit. It doesn't help that the price of anything in a can (looking at you seltzer) is straight up double what it used to be. I used to get four 12-packs of seltzer for 8.88. Now, three for 10 is the best deal there is. And that's because you can't really skimp and water down the quality of seltzer, because its about as basic as it gets, versus canned soups where you can apparently 3D print meat (paraphrasing) to save money.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent