Did you know that Truthout is a nonprofit and independently funded by readers like you? If you value what we do, please support our work with a donation.
“I’m 98 percent confident we can make a tomato that tastes substantially better,” Professor Harry Klee recently exulted to The New York Times.
Hmmm. Excuse me, professor, but “substantially better” than what? One of Momma Nature’s own heirloom varieties perhaps? No, no — Klee knows that tomato-tampering flavorologists like him can’t get near that quality.
Rather, he’s merely out to endow the industrial, massed-produced fruits of agribusiness with enough tomato-y taste to pass as a minimally acceptable version of the real thing.
How? By artificially injecting them with some flavor genes from actual tomatoes. Why? So the corporate powers can retake market share and profits they’ve been losing to small producers of the natural product.
That mission raises another question: “Ideal” for whom? It’ll still be a bland, mass-produced tomato doused with pesticides, machine harvested while green, and shipped across country. It’s only ideal for the maximization of corporate profits. Where did this guy come from? Monsanto, where he was employed for 11 years to help bring dangerously-untested-and-unlabeled bioengineered food to market. Now at the University of Florida’s Institute for Plant Innovation, backed by Monsanto, Klee leads the effort to innovate what’s called “a chemical recipe for the ideal tomato.”
And beware, for the tomato isn’t the only target of this academic-industrial complex. Klee & Company are also re-doing the blueberry to be, as the Times called it, “crispy, almost apple-like.” Wow, I’ll bet that next they’ll manufacture apples to be almost blueberry-like.
Why are the public’s scarce research dollars being frittered away on these absurd corporate projects?
Klee claims that it’s all about “bringing back flavor.” But professor, flavor never left. Go to a farmers market and taste for yourself.
Important Message: Please Read
For 25 years, Truthout has survived by publishing impactful investigative journalism and analysis; distributing full editions 365 days a year; and building a community of readers who support us with small, hard-earned donations.
Eighty percent of our $3 million yearly budget comes from small donors alone. Of those, 8,000 readers support us with monthly donations. Back in 2018, when Facebook decided to suppress the circulation of posts made by organizations, thereby cutting readers off from seeing many articles shared by the news organizations they had intentionally decided to follow, Truthout’s total traffic declined by 40 percent, as nearly all of our traffic from that platform disappeared.
As Google plans to roll out its new AI search bar, providing shoddy AI summaries instead of directing readers to our site, the consequences promise to be even more explosive. Google Search is our single largest source of traffic; it’s the route by which 27 percent of our readers find us. If even half of that 27 percent disappears, it will have a devastating impact on our journalism.
The entire journalism ecosystem will shoulder this blow, particularly independent publishers and news sites that depend on traffic and aren’t bankrolled by large corporations. If you can support Truthout with a donation today, you can help us resist the inevitability of Big Tech’s AI takeover. Please give today.