A Pinch of Ethics and a <i>Soupcon</i> of Home Cooking: Soft-Selling Supermarkets on Food Television
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>On 27 August 2013, Australian commercial broadcaster Network Tenscreened a new reality show, <i>Recipe to Riches</i>, in a primetime slot.Based on a Canadian format of the same name, the show sees contestants- ordinary people with no formal training or food credentials -competing for the prize of having their homemade recipes recognisedas worthy of being top-selling supermarket products. This chapter discussesthe Australian version of this somewhat unusual reality show,situating the rise of the format in the broader contexts of the increasingpoliticisation and scrutiny of food production and provenance aswell as the role of agribusiness and supermarket players in Australiaand internationally. Reality-based food shows like <i>MasterChef</i> Australia(Network Ten 2009-) have proved to be highly successful commercialventures, integrating 'below-the-line' advertising and commoditiesseamlessly into their format structure and content. Sponsored by majorAustralian supermarket chain, Woolworths, <i>Recipe to Riches</i> takes thiscommercial logic considerably further. Turning the recipes of ordinaryAustralians into mass products through a large-scale 'batch up' processin a (purportedly} commercial kitchen, the show's narrative involvesdeveloping a branding strategy and a product launch, finally resultingin its temporary placement on Woolworth's shelves, at which pointviewers get to vote for their favourite product by buying it in-store oronline.</p><p>While the show's commercial logic is clearly linked, at least in part,to increasing product sales, as one of only two dominant players inthe Australian supermarket sector (the Coles supermarket chain is theother), we argue that <i>Recipe to Riches</i> is primarily about boosting theimage of supermarkets in the community. In recent years, supermarketsin Australia have come under attack for their perceived poor treatmentof farmers, suppliers and local producers, while questions of animal welfarehave resulted in mounting pressure on the two majors to stockmore 'ethical' products. At the same time, foodie culture and cookingat home have undergone something of a renaissance, with celebritychefs like Jamie Oliver (who is highly popular in Australia) encouragingpeople to cook from scratch rather than eat processed foods,and home-grown chef-personalities like Stephanie Alexander and herKitchen Garden Foundation teaching a new generation of foodies inschools across Australia how to grow, harvest and prepare healthy food.This artisanal turn has also occurred against the backdrop of an increasingcritical focus on the industrialisation of food in mainstream media.In this context, we argue that <i>Recipe to Riches</i> can be seen as attemptingto reconfigure the public image of supermarkets. Describing itselfas 'lifting the lid' on supermarket products, the show borrows fromthe behind the scenes conventions of critical revelatory TV shows anddocumentaries exposing the practices of food processing and industrialagribusiness, such as <i>Food Inc</i>. (2008), <i>Food Factory</i> (BBC One, 2012),<i>Jamie's Fowl Dinners</i> (Channel 4, 2008), <i>Jamie Oliver's Food Revolution</i>(ABC, 2010) and <i>Hugh's Chicken Run</i> (Channel 4, 2008). This chapterwill discuss the ways in which <i>Recipe to Riches</i> reworks the critical logicof such shows for its own ends by attempting to gloss over the industrialrealities behind Woolworth's processed food products and to link supermarketproducts with the homes, recipes and artisanal cooking skills ofordinary Australians and with the ethical credentials of celebrity chefs.Locating the show within the broader context of heightened mainstreamawareness of, and concerns about, how we produce, source andbuy our food, we discuss the growing role of shows like <i>Recipe to Riches</i>and non-state actors like supermarkets and celebrity chefs in attemptingto intervene in and shape normative discourses and practices aroundfood ethics and politics.</p><p>Before discussing Woolworths' strategic use of <i>Recipe to Riches</i> as avehicle to appropriate and re-figure questions of food production andprovenance, the chapter provides a broad contextual background to therecent foray of supermarkets in to the televisual space. Accordingly, thechapter is structured as follows: it begins by briefly mapping the growingmedia focus on questions of where our food is sourced and how itis produced. It then outlines the recent media critiques of supermarkets,focusing on contemporary debates in Australia. This is followed by areview of some of the ways supermarkets have attempted to respond tothese critiques before moving on to an in-depth examination of <i>Recipe toRiches</i> and the way in which it attempts to intervene in, and reshape theterms of, debates around industrialised food production and lengthenedcommodity chains.</p>
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".