- 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.”
Child Safety Advocates Urge Facebook To Scrap Plans for Instagram Kids
- Nearly 100 child safety experts and international organizations sent a letter to Facebook Thursday criticizing its plans to develop an Instagram app for children under 13.
- Facebook claims the app will offer parental controls and is meant to create a safer space for kids, who are often lying about their age to access the normal version of Instagram.
- Still, critics point out that children already on Instagram are unlikely to switch to a kids version. Many also cited concerns about screen time, mental health, and privacy, arguing that younger children are not ready for such a platform.
- U.S. Lawmakers expressed similar concerns earlier this month, saying, “Facebook has an obligation to ensure that any new platforms or projects targeting children put those users’ welfare first, and we are skeptical that Facebook is prepared to fulfill this obligation.”
Instagram for Kids
An international group of 35 organizations and 64 experts, coordinated by the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood, released a letter Thursday urging Facebook to abandon its plans to release an Instagram app for kids under 13-years old.
Plans for Instagram Kids have been public for about a month after Buzzfeed News obtained emails about the app in mid-March. Since then, there have been widespread concerns about how such an app could affect children.
Thursday’s letter argues that a version of Instagram targeting under-13-year-olds raises concerns about privacy, screen time, mental health, self-esteem, and commercial pressure. Stephanie Otway, a spokesperson for Facebook, said the company understands the concerns presented by the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood.
“We agree that any experience we develop must prioritize their safety and privacy, and we will consult with experts in child development, child safety and mental health, and privacy advocates to inform it,” she said.
“The reality is that kids are online. They want to connect with their family and friends, have fun and learn, and we want to help them do that in a way that is safe and age-appropriate. We also want to find practical solutions to the ongoing industry problem of kids lying about their age to access apps,” Otway added, noting the reality of how many children interact with age-gated apps.
Unlikely To Stop Children From Joining Regular Instagram
The idea that children would just switch to Instagram Kids received pushback from the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood. In fact, the group’s executive director, Josh Golin, pointed out that most kids who are currently on Instagram are between 10 and 12-years-old, and they likely wouldn’t migrate over to Instagram Kids because it will be perceived as “babyish and not cool enough.”
”The children this will appeal to will be much younger kids,” Golin explained. “So they are not swapping out an unsafe version of Instagram for a safer version. They are creating new demand from a new audience that’s not ready for any type of Instagram product.”
It’s unknown exactly how the app would work, but it would feature content similar to what is allowed in other age-appropriate apps, such as YouTube Kids. One of the few details given out so far is that Instagram Kids will be ad-free and feature parental control options.
Concerns over Instagram Kids has also come from lawmakers. On April 5th Senators Edward Markey (D-Mass.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), alongside Representatives Kathy Castor (D-Fla.) and Lori Trahan (D-Mass.), sent a letter to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg expressing concerns that “children are a uniquely vulnerable population online, and images of kids are highly sensitive data.”
“Facebook has an obligation to ensure that any new platforms or projects targeting children put those users’ welfare first, and we are skeptical that Facebook is prepared to fulfill this obligation.”
See what others are saying: (TechCrunch) (BBC) (NBC News)
Retail Sales Jump Amid Stimulus Spending, Unemployment Claims Plunge To Pandemic Low
- The Commerce Department released a report Thursday recording a 9.8% spike in retail sales for the month of March.
- That surge was largely driven by stimulus check spending, with restaurant, sporting goods, clothing and accessory, and auto sales all being among the top-performing sectors in retail for the month.
- Coupled with that news, the Labor Department reported that 576,000 unemployment claims were filed last month — a pandemic low.
- That figure is still significantly higher than the roughly 200,000 weekly unemployment claims filed before the pandemic.
Retail Sales Spike
U.S. retail sales for the month of March jumped 9.8% from February, according to a Thursday morning report from the Commerce Department.
That spike is largely thanks to the most recent round of stimulus checks from Congress.
March was the best month of retail spending since May of last year, which at the time saw an 18.3% gain following the first wave of stimulus checks.
Sales in the bar and restaurant industry rose 13.4%, making them among the retail sectors that saw the biggest spikes last month. That’s largely a result of relaxed lockdowns stemming from the country’s current pace of around three million vaccinations a day. Meanwhile, sporting goods spending rose 23.5%, clothing and accessory sales rose 18.3%, and motor vehicle parts and dealer sales rose 15.1%.
“Spending will almost certainly drop back in April as some of the stimulus boost wears off,” wrote Michael Pearce, senior U.S. economist at Capital Economics, “but with the vaccination rollout proceeding at a rapid pace and households finances in strong shape, we expect overall consumption growth to continue rebounding rapidly in the second quarter too.”
Unemployment Hits Pandemic Low
The retail sales data came around the same time that the Labor Department released this past week’s unemployment figures, which dropped to a new pandemic low of 576,000 claims.
That’s a massive difference from almost exactly a year ago when 6 million people filed for unemployment in a single week. It’s also a significant decline from the 769,000 people that filed jobless claims last week, especially since some analysts had predicted there would be around 700,000 jobs lost with this week’s report.
That said, unemployment claims are still much higher than the around 200,000 a week that were being filed prior to pandemic closures.
“You’re still not popping champagne corks,” Diane Swonk, chief economist at the accounting firm Grant Thornton, said according to The New York Times. “I will breathe again — and breathe easy again — once we get these number[s] back down in the 200,000 range.”
See what others are saying: (The New York Times) (CNBC) (Fox Business)
Hundreds of Businesses and Celebrities Join Growing Fight Against Restrictive Voting Efforts
- In a letter published Wednesday, hundreds of major companies, law firms, corporate leaders, and celebrities banded together “to oppose any discriminatory legislation or measures that restrict or prevent any eligible voter from having an equal and fair opportunity to cast a ballot.”
- The list of signatories includes companies like Facebook, Twitter, and Amazon; celebrities such as Demi Lovato, Katy Perry, and Samuel L. Jackson; and billionaire investor Warren Buffet, among others.
- Though the letter does not address any specific voting legislation, it was organized by Kenneth Chenault and Kenneth Fraizer, who also organized a letter late last month in which more than 70 Black executives urged companies to take a stand against GOP-led restrictive voting proposals being floated in dozens of states.
Hundreds of Companies Oppose Restrictive Voting
The number of companies speaking out against a series of GOP-led voting proposals is growing, despite calls from notable Republicans for boycotts against companies doing so.
In a letter published Wednesday morning, hundreds of major companies, law firms, corporate leaders, and celebrities united behind what journalist David Gelles described as “the biggest show of solidarity to date.”
The letter itself doesn’t specifically call out Republican voting efforts. Instead, the statement reads, “We stand for democracy,” with the signatories also vowing “to oppose any discriminatory legislation or measures that restrict or prevent any eligible voter from having an equal and fair opportunity to cast a ballot.”
Still, the letter comes in the middle of an ongoing battle between corporate America and the GOP, which is backing dozens of state proposals that many have condemned as restrictive and discriminatory against poorer individuals and people of color.
The slew of companies that signed Wednesday’s letter includes Target, Netflix, Bank of America, Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft, Starbucks, Amazon, Mastercard, American Airlines, United Airlines, and others.
The letter also boasts star-power from celebrities like Demi Lovato, Katy Perry, Gwyneth Paltrow, George Clooney, and Samuel L. Jackson, among others. Notably, billionaire investor Warren Buffet also added his name to this list.
Companies Debate Taking Action Against States That Pass Restrictive Voting Measures
Wednesday’s letter was organized by Kenneth Chenault and Kenneth Frazier, who late last month also organized a similar letter from a group of more than 70 Black executives. That message, which urged companies to speak out against the GOP-led proposals, has largely been credited with helping to catalyze the fight between the GOP and corporate America.
This past weekend, the two also partially led a Zoom call that featured over 120 CEOs and business leaders.
During that call, participating executives considered a number of possible steps, including pulling donations to politicians who support restrictive voting measures, refusing to move business or jobs to states that pass such laws, and even relocating events; however, no hard plans were actually set into motion.
Still, some groups have already gone forward with various forms of protests against such laws. Last week, Major League Baseball announced it was moving its All-Star game out of Georgia, which recently passed a series of restrictive voting measures. On Monday, actor Will Smith and director Antoine Fuqua also announced that they no longer plan to film their runaway slave thriller “Emancipation” in the state.
Some Companies Didn’t Speak Out in Wednesday’s Letter
Both federal and state Republicans have been very vocal as businesses have continued to lob criticism at their proposed laws.
Last week, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell warned businesses to “stay out of politics,” though he later walked back that statement.
Two weeks ago, the Georgia state House voted to strip Delta Airlines of its tax breaks after the company spoke out against the state’s new voting laws. In fact, that reprimand might explain why it and other Georgia-based companies like Coca-Cola were absent from Wednesday’s letter.
According to The New York Times, people involved in the process of organizing this letter said those companies feared more blowback and also did not feel the need to speak up again.
Connected to that, The Times reported that some companies originally tried to have the line of “oppos[ing] any discriminatory legislation” removed, but they later signed anyway after Chenault and Frazier insisted the line was crucial.