General Mills Says If You Like Them on Facebook Then You Cannot Sue Them

April 18, 2014

General Mills Says If You Like Them on Facebook Then You Cannot Sue Them

by Kit Perez in Headlines 3 Comments

While this is a departure from my normal litany of NSA abuses and federal overreach, this one couldn’t be passed up. General Mills, maker of all the yummiest GMO-infested cereals, “fruit” snacks and other Things That Taste Good But Are Bad For You, has decided to include changes to its privacy policy that make it nearly impossible for consumers to ever sue them for any reason. How do they pull this off? Business Insider has the scoop:

General Mills has placed a banner at the top of its website announcing changes to its legal terms that will require all consumer complaints to be settled either through an informal e-mail back-and-forth or through individual arbitration…What’s particularly outrageous about the updated policy is General Mills’ assertion that consumers agree to the terms by doing things as simple as visiting one of its websites, liking one of its brands on Facebook, or buying one of its products.

While consumers are allowed to opt out of the new terms, the policy specifies that consumers opt back in the moment they buy a General Mills product (which includes brands like Cheerios, Betty Crocker, Pillsbury and others), or visit one of its websites or social media pages.

Keep in mind that GM has been called out for such things as lying about GMOs in Cheerios (then claiming the grain was GMO-free but remaining silent on the fact that all the other ingredients of Cheerios contain GMOs). They also had to pay more than $8 million “to settle a suit that accused it of making false claims about the health benefits of its Yoplait Yo-Plus yogurt, and agreeing to take pictures of strawberries off the labels of its Strawberry Fruit Roll-Ups after consumers claimed the fruit was not actually an ingredient.”

In short, they’ve made a practice of lying to consumers, and in an effort to ensure that they don’t get embroiled in another big-dollar class action lawsuit, they’ve now figured out a way to force consumers into either arbitration or having a casual conversation with some customer service rep. It doesn’t matter what the company does; if you click Like on a Facebook page for Cheerios to get a $1.00 off coupon, or if you click an ad, or—as Whataburger told its customers in 2008—even walking through the door of their establishment means you agree to arbitration and forfeit your right to bring a lawsuit. While any liberty-minded conservative abhors frivolous lawsuits as much as the next guy, the truth is that some lawsuits—when brought for reasons like false advertising, among other things—actually help make companies accountable to the public. When a company lies about its ingredients or engages in false labeling practices, there’s a very real risk of people dying because of it.

Why should you care? Here’s why. The problem is layered: GM makes a lot of grocery products; food that you and your family put into your bodies. What if your child died because of an allergy to an ingredient that GM failed to mention in its product? What if they started putting harmful chemicals in your food to save money? It’s not like it’s a far-fetched idea. The entire anti-GMO movement is because of just such acts by various companies—and GM is one of those companies. Think about it: Strawberry Fruit Roll-ups do not even contain strawberries. Don’t you think it’s important to mention that?

In a free market, the consumer decides what businesses fail and what businesses thrive. When a corporation can stack the deck by taking away a consumer’s means of holding them accountable—so they can go on deceiving that same consumer about what’s in their food—there’s a problem.

chemicals food General Mills GMO Kit Lange lawsuits litigation

Written by Kit Perez

3 Comments

Xavier says:

April 18, 2014 at 4:57 pm

Companies make a lot of self-protective statements that are clearly unlawful. Once before I mentioned the “not responsible for valuables left in room” sign on the back of hotel doors – utter BS, but it may help avoid the hotel’s liability as long as people believe it’s a binding legal notice. I’d like to see GM’s claims tested in court, as I suspect they’d be laughed at and told to stop lying to the public, again.

Reply
VALman says:

April 19, 2014 at 7:29 am

Damn! Now, I need a lawyer just to eat my Cherrios. This sans there;\’s not much “cheer” to them anymore. Well, I guess there’s always oatmeal.

Reply
- VALman says:
  
  April 19, 2014 at 7:31 am
  
  Let’s try that again: Damn! Now, I need a lawyer just to eat my Cherrios. This means that there’s not much “cheer” to them anymore. Well, I guess there’s always oatmeal.
  
  Reply