Although Starbucks and the environment are not always a heavily discussed topic within the media, I was able to find a major article by CNN written by Danielle Wiener-Bronner titled, “Forget plastic straws. Starbucks has a cup problem”. Immediately, I began to check the sources used in the article. Some included the New York Times, McDonald’s Commercials, Starbucks Company Reports, and other CNN articles that also cited reliable sources like the Seattle Government Reports.
Now that I knew the article referred to reliable sources, I felt that this made the information more trustworthy. If there had been fewer cited sources or had the sources they used from other CNN articles not been directly linked to where they found their information, any influence the article would have had would become obsolete. The method they used for citing their sources was through linking the information directly in the article making it extremely easy to navigate. The links led directly to videos, reports, and articles that led to even more reports.
Wiener-Bronner fairly explained both sides of the situation from a consumer’s perspective and the company’s perspective. She discussed the next GEN cup challenge where $10 million is being offered to whoever can come up with an alternative material for cups produced at Starbucks in order to reduce waste. They also explored the scientific background as to why it is such a struggle to produce an alternative material for the cups. It was explained that as of right now the non-recyclable cups have a plastic lining that breaks down to micro plastics that can harm marine life and humans as well. The article included comparisons to other companies like McDonald’s and Disney which are facing similar concerns. It felt that every angle was covered on the topic at hand, making it a powerful read.
They presented all of the information known at this time as to how Starbucks is reducing their carbon footprint in an informative and organized way. However, it would have been nice to only include the statistical truths, as there was a heavy usage of transparent bias. Some examples include, “Sometimes, all it takes is one spark to light a fire” and ”Sudden turn against plastic straws over the last couple years had humble beginnings”. The author also included a song based off of Jingle Bells performed by children about a cup monster which was created in order to advocate against single cup usage. I feel that just because articles include insinuations or bias this does not mean that they are completely incorrect or unreliable. Regardless, they are influential. I don’t have a statistical source to cite but in my experience, people typically are more moved by reading something that has a voice within the writing. This type of information would never go viral if there wasn’t some personality behind it to make it known. Without a big personality to help bring the information to the forefront, then there would be no awareness brought to the subject and the masses wouldn’t be able to contribute to the subject either.
After all, the entire Starbucks movement against straws started with a YouTube video posted by a nine-year-old boy on statistics of straws being used by companies.
