The media choke on a Twinkie
[O]ne of the major parties to the Twinkie bankruptcy, the bakery union, has been unstinting in explaining the company’s trouble in written and spoken word to anyone who wants to listen. The Hostess brands are valuable. …
Hostess’s problem, as the bakers point out in bankruptcy filings printed in legible English, and as Hostess management has pointed out in its own equally readable filings, is that Hostess’s valuable parts are held back by Hostess’s high-cost, Teamster-staffed system for moving Twinkies and other delights from production facility to store shelf.
The Teamsters, who swallowed hard and agreed to concessions in hopes of avoiding liquidation, are telling you something too. The Teamsters are telling you, quite rationally, that nothing of value would likely remain in the Hostess distribution system in a liquidation. Look at the buyers lining up for the Hostess brands, such as Tastykake owner Flower Foods and the investment fund that owns Pabst Blue Ribbon, who slaver after an opportunity to roll Twinkies and related indulgences into their own existing delivery networks. They slaver after Hostess’s distribution operations not at all. …
So who is to blame for the Hostess outcome? Sometimes we look around the office and see the bright, intelligent-looking faces of the next generation and we feel a surge of hope that the future will bring us a media that not only gets its facts right but can reason carefully too.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Objective reporting?
now that’s an oxymoron.
LincolntheHun on November 28, 2012 at 11:48 AM
Holman…lay off whatever you’re smoking that made you desire Twinkies; that was once strange article.
Bishop on November 28, 2012 at 11:49 AM
Huh?
KS Rex on November 28, 2012 at 11:51 AM
In a competent compositional structure, when a paragraph starts with a question the answer usually follows.
Mitoch55 on November 28, 2012 at 11:56 AM
Journalists–the down twinkies generation
vityas on November 28, 2012 at 12:02 PM
After reading the whole article, I reached the same conclusion.
He want’s to implicate the media but doesn’t exactly come out and make a specfic charge against them.
WisRich on November 28, 2012 at 12:04 PM
Twinkies have been under heavy fire from the left since Dan White. Then the anti-obesity food police have regularly pot-shotted them in traditional leftist fashion. Sales have fallen. The company can’t support their own union obligations. And the media blames old men who wear morning suits, top hats and monocles.
Little Debbie Cloud Cakes are not as good as Twinkies, but to put it in perspective, we are talking about lard and sugar filled sponge cakes here.
Greek Fire on November 28, 2012 at 12:17 PM
Down twinkles!
trs on November 28, 2012 at 12:18 PM
Weird article. Even if the author had a point, he meandered around it. What exactly did the media get wrong? He bemoans the inability of the press to reason, but the article itself is not a good example of clear reasoning.
Baerwulf on November 28, 2012 at 12:25 PM
This nonsensical article must have been written by the White House propaganda office.
Pork-Chop on November 28, 2012 at 12:38 PM
It’s impossible to choke on a Twinkie.
forest on November 28, 2012 at 12:40 PM
But, bless his heart, he tried.
Fallon on November 28, 2012 at 12:40 PM
Participation Trophy!
/will miss ding dongs
roy_batty on November 28, 2012 at 12:55 PM
So it was all the Teamster’ fault? Since the Teamsters were willing to make concessions set up by the court, why wouldn’t the bakers then go along? Why would the bakers union choose to use voice vote? If one union undercuts another, where is the animus, on either side?
Companies showing interest in the Hostess brand are are not necessarily going to retain workers. The most valuable parts are often the shelf space in the supermarket, not the factories. Less competition on the shelves funnels customers to the next (equally lousy) brand.
The author doesn’t blame the product. Once the first choice in junk food, Hostess has lost market to other brands not only because of delivery and shelf location. Hostess changed recipes. Usurpers have followed suit and dropped quality as they gained market, and you can measure the change in desirability at checkout. It ain’t your daddy’s Twinkie. I know. My grandmother kept a cake dish full of them for visitors.
Most of the Hostess news coverage was notalgia, people remembering how they used to love Hostess
People crave junk food and they seek brands for reliable satisfaction. Low fat junk foods do not satisfy hunger, and also lead to high/low blood sugar surges and more craving. Cutting the fat is part of the Hostess fall. A bad shelf spot is bad only for weak product.
The company rode a wave and everyone was in on it. I can’t imagine the big shots at Hostess thought they had products so good its all they ate at home. Doubt the union guys thought they had the best goods either, but everyone wanted the big bucks
entagor on November 28, 2012 at 1:59 PM