• don@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    What was said, from the article:

    Local 4 News in Detroit broadcast portions of the recording. In it, a speaker identified as Bally is heard saying, “We have s**t for f***king poor people. 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.”

    He also referenced “bioengineered meat,” saying, “I don’t wanna eat a piece of chicken that came from a 3D printer.”

    The recording, which lasted longer than an hour and 15 minutes, included what Garza said was a “disgusting” rant alleged to be made by Bally about his coworkers: “F***ing Indians don’t know a f***ing thing,” and “Like they couldn’t think for their f***ing selves,” it said in part.

    • finalarbiter@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      The bioengineered meat bit is honestly hilarious to me, it’s clear this guy has no relation to actual production. 3D printed meat is nowhere near viable for the scale of production that Campbells operates at- it can’t keep up with the sheer volume required and it is significantly more expensive than traditional meat production.

      Dude’s just gone off the deep end with right-wing conspiracy theories, which makes sense given the whole racist tirade and hating the poor.

    • renegadespork@lemmy.jelliefrontier.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      3 hours ago

      The craziest thing to me about this is that the employee (who was very smart to record this conversation) literally used official internal channels to report this. Rather than deal with it professionally, they fired him for being honest.

      Well, I guess it’s time to leak to the press, then…

      Also, from those remarks, it really seems like the VP hates his job. They should’ve done him and the company a favor and fired him instead.

    • andros_rex@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      3 hours ago

      The companies Facebook is getting wrecked by the “MAHA” crowd, which is pretty hilarious. They are not happy about the bio-engineered meat.

    • jqubed@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      2 hours ago

      “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.)

      • samus12345@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        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.

        • Aeao@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          59 minutes ago

          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

          • samus12345@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            25 minutes ago

            “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.

            • Aeao@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              32 seconds ago

              Omg I just realized my money concept also applies to sex.

              “My wife and I were slapping the banker last night”

            • Aeao@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 minutes ago

              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.