Who's Responsible For The Chinese Poison Train? Us!
Apparently we were wrong about this whole "Chinese Poison Train" thing. It turns out that it was "filthy U.S. inspectors" who were tainting "pristine Chinese shipments" all along, according to The Onion.
LONG BEACH, CA-According to analysts, a perfectly clean and healthy shipment of Yu Wan Mei Tinned Fish Product, newly arrived from China, was rendered useless by the tainted hands of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Monday. The inspectors-whose mercury-covered fingers had reportedly been dragged through towering mountains of bird dung before handling the superior fish product-molested the shipping container on the corrupt docks of California and took every effort to endanger the well-being of America's fish-consuming population. "The fish product was beautiful when it left our factories," said Zuo Xiabing, CEO of Yu Wan Mei. "It is no longer that way. I would prefer not to sell it to anyone in this impure condition, but sometimes the desire for fish product is so great that people will buy it no matter the risk." It is speculated that the vile inspectors somehow conjured superhuman speed and strength in order to puncture at least half of the lead-tin alloy containers and insert melamine into the other half. There exists no other explanation.
We apologize for the error.
Pristine Shipment Of Fish Product Contaminated By Filthy U.S. Inspectors [The Onion]
(Photo: Mica_R)
Post a comment
Comments:
@takes_so_little: While this item may be farce, a few years ago some South American produce (Argentinian, IIRC) was declared "tainted" and "unsafe" by US inspectors.
The food turned out to be completely safe to eat, and the claims may have been done as a protectionist tactic against imports, not out of concern for public safety.
Be aware, this is a story from "The Onion".
Though the story is dubious, does anyone doubt that US companies would buy the fish anyway if they thought their customers wouldn't find out?
The Onion just can't compete with real news anymore.
Every few years there are stories about how restaurants sell cheap fish as expensive fish, and often it is the fish company / distributer who is pulling the scam. While a cheap type of fish is certainly less harmful than an unsafe fish, it shows that some companies would be willing to bait and switch, no pun intended.
There's just no excuse for neckbeard anymore.
How long until the Chinese media pick this up as a legitimate story?
My favorite Onion headline of all time was the one, right after Shrub was elected, that blared, At long last, our long national nightmare of Peace and Prosperity is Over!
The Onion can't compete with the real news anymore, indeed.
@chiieddy:
You beat me to it!
A couple of years ago the Chinese media picked up an Onion story & ran it as legit.
I'm sure they'll do that with this one.
I don't think The Onion was ever meant to compete with real news, but an offshoot of "news" for great ridicule and entertainment.
@Trai_Dep: On the heels of Jon Stewart being polled as the most trusted news man in america, The Onion has been voted as the most trusted news website.
I think what he meant was that although the Onion tries to spoof the news and come up with ridiculous stories, the real stories coming from real news outlets these days are often more bizarre.
FTO: "It is speculated that the vile inspectors somehow conjured superhuman speed and strength in order to puncture at least half of the lead-tin alloy containers and insert melamine into the other half. There exists no other explanation."
Hilarious! :-)
@henrygates: You've obviously forgotten or not heard about the tainted tuna scandal in Canada during 1985.
And anyway, it doesn't have to be fish. Just look at Monsanto and how they pushed their GMO Frankenfoods onto consumers - with bribes to politicians, and without consent of the public. Many have speculated unnatural plants are party of why bee populations are dying off worldwide, and some evidence backs the claims.
While I definitely appreciate the humor from this post, I do consider Consumerist to be a news-quality publication in that past posts have been of such high quality that readers might potentially accept any post on this site prima facie. Even though one would hope most people would see "The Onion" and automatically understand it's intended to be fake and funny, there's probably many people who have never heard of that site before. If the Consumerist does decide to post satirical posts in the future, perhaps the post should end with a disclaimer, or at least a tag that indicates the post is satirical in nature.
@Raymond Chow: Or you know, they could make some sort of mention of The Onion in the original post. I think that might just do the trick...
@YOXIM:
As Raymond states (paraphrased); there are "many people who have never heard of [The Onion] before."
So just "mak[ing] some sort of mention of The Onion", would still not forewarn uninformed readers of the satirical nature of the Onion site and its content.
Especially when presented by the Consumerist, which for the vast majority of the time posts serious consumer related issues.
That said, catastrophegirl's suggestion to replace the [APOLOGIES] tag with a [SPOOF] tag would help. I'd suggest it be a [SATIRE] tag though.
I think he's the best QB the Broncos have! I know the Spleen is putting up a good fight, but I'm sure Neckbeard will be be the starter for Day 1.
Wait, The Consumerist isn't taking The Onion seriously, is it? Or is the Consumerist messing around with us?
I demand an explanation, Carey!
...and people, saying The Onion can't compete with real news is like saying Stephen Colbert can't compete as well. Even until this day I can't stop laughing at the "Sony Releases New Stupid Piece Of Shit That Doesn't Fucking Work".
@catastrophegirl - sometimes makes typos and doesn't care:
Ahh yes. You're correct, I see it in the tag list at the bottom.
I was referring to the headlining tag (first tag). It's the one displayed at the top of the article and in the feed on the front page. (Much more visible that the others.)
:-)
(eagerly awaiting first irate commenter who reads headline only)