Ethiopia vs. Starbucks
OK. Someone's gonna have to set the record straight here. Or is this one in the "wait-and-see-what-the-judge-says-before-making-a-decision" category?
The accusation: Starbucks has positioned itself as "Coffee That Cares" to gain a loyal customer base. Now they've become greedy hypocrites and are cheating Ethiopian farmers out of opportunities to make fair profits on their coffee.
Big Guy exploits Little Guy for profits. Little Guy starves.
The defense: "No, we're not!" (otherwise known as "nuht-uh")
The rebuttal: "Yes, you are." ("mmmm-hmmm")
So Starbucks looks guilty. It must be true. After all, I read it on the internet!
Does anyone have any insight on this one?