> A big part of what made people feel uncomfortable with the taco truck story was, I suspect, that these recipes were not freely shared. Instead they were reverse-engineered.
Just as a thought experiment. If they went to Italy and did the same thing to learn how to make pasta, then opened their own Italian restaurant, would anyone care? If they went to France and spied on pastry shops to learn how to make the perfect croissant, would anyone care?
If two Mexican ladies went to North Carolina and stole the secrets of BBQ and opened their own BBQ joint in Guadalajara, would anyone care? Would we be questioning their ethics?
If you read the original profile[1] it's a pretty standard foodie piece about people who really enjoyed a food, learned how to make it themselves, and wanted to bring it back to where they're from.
The parasitic clickbait mic.com article pulls a few quotes out of context, then Russell Conjugates[2] the narrative to cast the pair as evil villains who exploit helpless minorities. Note how they're not just telling the story of what inspired them to start a taco truck, now they are bragging about stealing recipes. This is a hit piece that is engineered to direct online vitriol towards them, for the crime of being white people selling tacos.
Free speech, of course. People can write whatever they want. But I think it's important to ask ourselves, who is this helping? What is being accomplished here? Were these two ladies really such evil villains that deserved everything that comes with being the target of an online mob? (harassment, death threats, loss of livelihood, lifelong fear of anyone ever Googling your name...) Is this a great victory against systemic racism? Was the life of a single person of color, or anyone, improved by this? I mean, I guess it improved the bottom line of the publishers of Mic, but it's hard to see what else.
Just as a thought experiment. If they went to Italy and did the same thing to learn how to make pasta, then opened their own Italian restaurant, would anyone care? If they went to France and spied on pastry shops to learn how to make the perfect croissant, would anyone care?
If two Mexican ladies went to North Carolina and stole the secrets of BBQ and opened their own BBQ joint in Guadalajara, would anyone care? Would we be questioning their ethics?
If you read the original profile[1] it's a pretty standard foodie piece about people who really enjoyed a food, learned how to make it themselves, and wanted to bring it back to where they're from.
The parasitic clickbait mic.com article pulls a few quotes out of context, then Russell Conjugates[2] the narrative to cast the pair as evil villains who exploit helpless minorities. Note how they're not just telling the story of what inspired them to start a taco truck, now they are bragging about stealing recipes. This is a hit piece that is engineered to direct online vitriol towards them, for the crime of being white people selling tacos.
Free speech, of course. People can write whatever they want. But I think it's important to ask ourselves, who is this helping? What is being accomplished here? Were these two ladies really such evil villains that deserved everything that comes with being the target of an online mob? (harassment, death threats, loss of livelihood, lifelong fear of anyone ever Googling your name...) Is this a great victory against systemic racism? Was the life of a single person of color, or anyone, improved by this? I mean, I guess it improved the bottom line of the publishers of Mic, but it's hard to see what else.
[1] https://www.wweek.com/uncategorized/2017/05/16/kooks-serves-...
[2] https://tomdehnel.com/what-is-russell-conjugation/