- Footage has gone viral that shows a woman in a grocery store opening a container of ice cream, licking the top, and then placing it back into a store freezer for another customer to purchase.
- The ice cream brand Blue Bell now says they are working with authorities to track down the woman.
- The incident also prompted many to ask why the company does not have protective seals on its products.
- Blue Bell says a “natural seal” is created when the ice cream hardens upside down during production.
Blue Bell Ice Cream is looking for the woman seen in a viral clip opening a container of ice cream, licking the top, and putting it back into the store freezer.
Footage of the incident went viral on Twitter after a user who goes by the screen name Optimus Primal shared the clip on Saturday with the caption, “What kinda psychopathic behavior is this?!”
In the clip, which has over 11 million views, an individual offscreen can be heard encouraging the woman to lick the company’s Tin Roof flavored ice cream.
Who is she?
In a statement to Time Magazine, the user who shared the clip said he doesn’t know the woman in it and actually found the video on Instagram as part of a story shared by the actress Alexis Fields-Jackson.
The actress apparently doesn’t know the woman either. In a post on her Instagram, she wrote: “I am not the girl in the disgusting ice cream video. Leave me alone.” She also explained that she reposted the video like many others have and said it was removed by Instagram. The actress also promised to report those who have been defaming or threatening her over the confusion.
Some social media users have identified the ice cream licker as a woman from San Antonio, Texas named Asia. According to a report from Heavy, she was allegedly the owner of the Instagram account “xx.asiaaaa.xx” while it was still active. Twitter users say she boasted about becoming famous over the video and said she recently had the flu, which sparked even more outrage.
“Now you can call it Flu Bell ice cream ’cause I was a lil sick last week,” a screenshot of one comment by the account reads. The post goes on to encourage others to follow her lead and use the hashtag #TinRoofChallenge writing, “Let’s see if we can start an epidemic (literally).”
I’m leaving this here as court evidence, thank you pic.twitter.com/WwMCOxybcr— 𝘗𝘭𝘶𝘵𝘰. (@zbala_) June 29, 2019
@ILoveBlueBell please note that your legal counsel should file charges against this person for affecting your company’s profits & opened you to liable issues As she may have started a viral outbreak of the flu. Which were her intentions. LOCATION SAN ANTONIO TEXAS.— AskGeeves (@OnlyGeeves) June 30, 2019
Blue Bell Responds
People on Twitter have also made sure to make the ice cream brand aware of the situation. Blue Bell responded to several users on Twitter saying they “take the issue very seriously.”
In a statement on their website, the company said they are “currently working with law enforcement, retail partners, and social media platforms” to investigate.
“This type of incident will not be tolerated. Food safety is a top priority, and we work hard to provide a safe product and maintain the highest level of confidence from our consumers,” the company added.
Many users are calling for police to take action over the food tampering incident.
Assuming this isn’t just shot for reactions, and she really put the ice cream back for someone else to buy – it should be a felony.— Adam Sith (@dfunkedtt) June 29, 2019
I truly hope she is identified and charged with a crime. Everything is not cute. Everything is not funny. Ppl are too comfortable with this internet shit.— IG ugoddess_the_poet (@UGoddess_CT) June 29, 2019
I’m disgusted.— AskGeeves (@OnlyGeeves) June 30, 2019
This should be a criminal charge.
Overly dramatic, NO. People like me with a compromised immune system (#lupus) I go out of my may to stay away from germs often missing out on life moments. Then some pathetic excuse for a human can carelessly put lives at risk.
If the incident did happen in Texas, state law makes it a felony to tamper with consumer products if someone could be injured as a result. Depending on the degree of the charge, punishments can range from fines to jail time.
One viral tweet said the ice cream licker was charged with a felony. However, as of now police have not confirmed any arrest.
The girl that licked the ice cream got charged w a felony— dynasty (@dynastyycolee) July 1, 2019
In fact, San Antonio police told KSAT that they can’t confirm that the incident even happened in their jurisdiction and say it does not appear that the girl in the video lives in San Antonio. So as of now, where the incident happened and who is responsible remains unclear.
Aside from the outrage directed at the woman in the video, the incident also prompted many social media users to question why Blue Bell does not have protective seals on its ice cream containers.
Some even say the woman’s action don’t warrant an arrest but show that the company has a safety issue.
This is not funny. It’s sick behavior but it does not warrant criminal charges. It does is highlight why a lot of us don’t purchase Bluebell. They don’t have their product protected. #bluebellfingerpointing #realprotectiveseals #kidsplaypranks— PureLuv _33 (@LittlesSonya) July 2, 2019
w-where is the plastic seal— clean slate (@PleaseBeGneiss) June 30, 2019
@ILoveBlueBell seal your ice cream from now on please— Miguel (@fortunefaded19) June 29, 2019
The company responded to those complaints in their statement by saying, “During production, our half gallons are flipped upside down and sent to a hardening room where the ice cream freezes to the lid creating a natural seal.”
“The lids are frozen tightly to the carton,” the statement continued. “Any attempt at opening the product should be noticeable.”
Meta Reinstates Trump on Facebook and Instagram
The company, which banned the former president two years ago for his role in inciting the Jan. 6 insurrection, now says the risk to public safety has “sufficiently receded.”
Meta Ends Suspension
Meta announced Wednesday that it will reinstate the Facebook and Instagram accounts of former President Donald Trump, just two years after he was banned for using the platforms to incite a violent insurrection.
In a blog post, the company said the suspensions would be lifted “in the coming weeks” but with “new guardrails in place to deter repeat offenses.”
Specifically, Meta stated that due to Trump’s violations of its Community Standards, he will face “heightened penalties for repeat offenses” under new protocols for “public figures whose accounts are reinstated from suspensions related to civil unrest.”
“In the event that Mr. Trump posts further violating content, the content will be removed and he will be suspended for between one month and two years, depending on the severity of the violation,” the blog post continued.
The company also noted its updated protocols address content that doesn’t violate its Community Standards but “contributes to the sort of risk that materialized on January 6, such as content that delegitimizes an upcoming election or is related to QAnon.”
However, unlike direct violations, that content would have its distribution limited, but it would not be taken down. As a penalty for repeat offenses, Meta says it “may temporarily restrict access to […] advertising tools.”
As far as why the company is doing this, it explained that it assessed whether or not to extend the “unprecedented” two-year suspension it placed on Trump back in January of 2021 and determined that the risk to public safety had “sufficiently receded.”
Meta also argued that social media is “rooted in the belief that open debate and the free flow of ideas are important values” and it does not want to “get in the way of open, public and democratic debate.”
“The public should be able to hear what their politicians are saying — the good, the bad and the ugly — so that they can make informed choices at the ballot box,” the tech giant added.
Meta’s decision prompted widespread backlash from many people who argue the former president has clearly not learned from the past because he continues to share lies about the election, conspiracy theories, and other incendiary language on Truth Social.
“Trump incited an insurrection. And tried to stop the peaceful transfer of power,” Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Ca.) tweeted. “He’s shown no remorse. No contrition. Giving him back access to a social media platform to spread his lies and demagoguery is dangerous. @facebook caved, giving him a platform to do more harm.”
According to estimates last month by the advocacy groups Accountable Tech and Media Matters for America, over 350 of Trump’s posts on the platform would have explicitly violated Facebook’s policies against QAnon content, election claims, and harassment of marginalized groups.
“Mark Zuckerberg’s decision to reinstate Trump’s accounts is a prime example of putting profits above people’s safety,” NAACP President Derrick Johnson told NPR.
“It’s quite astonishing that one can spew hatred, fuel conspiracies, and incite a violent insurrection at our nation’s Capitol building, and Mark Zuckerberg still believes that is not enough to remove someone from his platforms.”
However, on the other side, many conservatives and Trump supporters have cheered the move as a win for free speech.
Others, like Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Oh.) also asserted that Trump “shouldn’t have been banned in the first place. Can’t happen again.”
Trump himself echoed that point on in a post on Truth Social, where he claimed Facebook has lost billions of dollars both removing and reinstating him.
“Such a thing should never again happen to a sitting President, or anybody else who is not deserving of retribution! THANK YOU TO TRUTH SOCIAL FOR DOING SUCH AN INCREDIBLE JOB. YOUR GROWTH IS OUTSTANDING, AND FUTURE UNLIMITED!!!” he continued.
The question that remains, however, is whether Trump will actually go back to Facebook or Instagram. As many have noted, the two were never his main platforms. Twitter was always been his preferred outlet, and while Elon Musk reinstated his account some time ago, he has not been posting on the site.
There is also the question of how Truth Social — which Trump created and put millions of dollars into — would survive if he went back to Meta’s platforms. The company is already struggling financially, and as Axios notes, if Trump moves back, it signals to investors that he is not confident in the company.
On the other hand, Trump’s lawyers formally petitioned Meta to reinstate him, which could indicate that this goes beyond just a symbolic win and is something he actually wants. Additionally, if he were to start engaging on Facebook and Instagram again, it would immediately give him access to his over 57 million followers across the two platforms while he continues his 2024 presidential campaign.
See what others are saying: (NPR) (Axios) (The New York Times)
Meta Encouraged to Change Nudity Policy in Potential Win For Free The Nipple Movement
The company’s oversight board said Meta’s current rules are too confusing to follow, and new guidelines should be developed to “respect international human rights standards.”
Rules Based in “A Binary View of Gender”
In a move many have described as a big step for Free The Nipple advocates, Meta’s oversight board released a decision Tuesday encouraging the company to modify its nudity and sexual activity policies so that social media users are treated “without discrimination on the basis of sex or gender.”
The board—which consists of lawyers, journalists, and academics—said the parent company of Facebook and Instagram should change its guidelines “so that it is governed by clear criteria that respect international human rights standards.”
Its decision came after a transgender and nonbinary couple had two different posts removed for alleged violations of Meta’s Sexual Solicitation Community Standard. Both posts included images of the couple bare-chested with their nipples covered along with captions discussing transgender healthcare, as they were fundraising for one of them to undergo top surgery.
Both posts, one from 2021 and another from 2022, were taken down after users reported it and Meta’s own automated system flagged it. The posts were restored after an appeal, but the oversight board stated that their initial removal highlights faults in the company’s policies.
“Removing these posts is not in line with Meta’s Community Standards, values or human rights responsibilities,” the board said in its decision,
According to the board, Meta’s sexual solicitation policy is too broad and creates confusion for social media users. The board also said the policy is “based on a binary view of gender and a distinction between male and female bodies.
“Such an approach makes it unclear how the rules apply to intersex, non-binary and transgender people, and requires reviewers to make rapid and subjective assessments of sex and gender, which is not practical when moderating content at scale,” the decision continued.
Free the Nipple Movement
The board stated that the rules get especially confusing regarding female nipples, “particularly as they apply to transgender and non-binary people.”
While there are exceptions to Meta’s rules, including posts in medical or health contexts, the board said that these exceptions are “often convoluted and poorly defined.”
“The lack of clarity inherent in this policy creates uncertainty for users and reviewers, and makes it unworkable in practice,” the decision said.
The board’s recommended that Meta change how it manages nudity on its platforms. The group also requested that Meta provide more details regarding what content specifically violates its Sexual Solicitation Community Standard.
For over a decade, Meta’s nudity policies have been condemned by many activists and users for strictly censoring female bodies. The Free the Nipple movement was created to combat rules that prevent users from sharing images of a bare female chest, but still allow men to freely post topless photos of themselves.
Big names including Rihanna, Miley Cyrus, and Florence Pugh have advocated for Free the Nipple.
Meta now has 60 days to respond to the board’s recommendations. In a statement to the New York Post, a spokesperson for the company said Meta is “constantly evaluating our policies to help make our platforms safer for everyone.”
See What Others Are Saying: (Mashable) (The New York Post) (Oversight Committee Decision)
Amazon Labor Union Receives Official Union Certification
The company already plans to appeal the decision.
Amazon Labor Union’s Victory
The National Labor Relations Board on Wednesday certified the Amazon Labor Union (ALU) Staten Island election from April, despite Amazon’s objections.
After Staten Island staffers won the vote to unionize by 500 votes in the spring of 2022, Amazon quickly filed a slew of objections, claiming that the ALU had improperly influenced the election. Amazon pushed for the results to be overturned.
Now, the National Labor Relations Board has dismissed Amazon’s allegations and certified the election. This certification gives legitimacy to the ALU and puts Amazon in a position to be penalized should they decide not to bargain with the union in good faith.
“We’re demanding that Amazon now, after certification, meet and bargain with us,” ALU attorney Seth Goldstein said to Motherboard regarding the certification. “We’re demanding bargaining, and if we need to, we’re going to move to get a court order enforcing our bargaining rights. It’s outrageous that they’ve been violating federal labor while they continue to do so.”
Negotiate or Appeal
Amazon has until Jan. 25 to begin bargaining with the ALU, or the online retailer can appeal the decision by the same deadline. The company has already announced its plan to appeal.
“As we’ve said since the beginning, we don’t believe this election process was fair, legitimate, or representative of the majority of what our team wants,” Amazon spokesperson Kelly Nantel, said in a statement.
This win comes after two recent defeats in ALU’s unionization efforts. The union lost an election at a facility in Albany and another in Staten Island.
ALU’s director Chris Smalls told Yahoo! Finance that he is unconcerned about these losses.
“For us, whatever campaign is ready to go, the Amazon Labor Union is going to throw their support behind it, no matter what…We know that it’s going to take collective action for Amazon to come to the table,” he told the outlet. “So, for us, it’s never unsuccessful. These are growing pains, and we’re going to fight and continue to grow.”