I honestly did not set out to dig up more stories from Vermont today–this one about Ben & Jerry’s was just the first one I came across (click here for the story.) The story does at least end on a positive note, with the company saying it will take steps to help its embittered franchisees, but what took them so long?

Do we really believe the figure they’ve now removed from their promotional materials was not intended to make some people see a rosier future than was realistic? Why did things have to progress to the point of lawsuits and being newsworthy enough for Newsweek before they started paying attention to things that should never have fallen off their radar screen in the first place? It’s a short story, to be sure, but anytime something shows up even being mentioned in most major media outlets, you can be sure you’re seeing just the tip of the iceberg.

The bureaucratic kicker is this line from the story: “Ben & Jerry’s says the complaints are either exaggerated or just plain wrong, and don’t represent the experience of most of its franchisees.”

Oh, please. Spare us. Since when does doing something good with the left hand excuse doing something bad with the right hand? Why should behaving properly with a hundred people excuse doing damage to eight people? (“B-b-but Your Honor, of the fifty people standing in line at the theater when I lost control of my car, only four were maimed. Those four don’t represent the experience of the majority!)

Another smoking gun, so to speak, is the claim that complaints are “exaggerated.” As sure as the Lord loves ducks, I think that’s one that every bureaucrat above the level of flunky must practice in their sleep. I bet they even have a secret handshake that goes with it, by which they identify themselves as True Bureaucrats.

I’ll have more about “exaggerated complaints” in a post to come soon.

Peace.

Debbie Alicen