Tuesday Tract: Should We Be Transparent About Transparency?
Waitin' On Good Guide's Ratings Committee
My saga of learning about Good Guide's ratings continues.
To "refresh your recollection" (I am a former lawyer, after all), let me take you back. Good Guide is a beta site that rates products on three scales: environmental, nutritional, and social justice (my terms, not theirs). They reduce a product and its producer to three numerical scores, with 10 being the top score. Then they combine the three scores to a single score purporting to rate a product/producer overall.
More than a month ago, I wrote to Good Guide through its website asking for help in understanding how it could rate a commercial "lite" yogurt (Yoplait) with all its additives, so much higher than an organic, plain whole milk (Straus) made from nothing more than organic whole milk and live yogurt cultures, and higher than an organic nonfat plain (Nancy's) made from nothing more than organic nonfat milk and live yogurt cultures.
Good Guide never responded -- so, last Tuesday's Tract, Radical Transparency: Lost in Translation set out my view that those particular ratings are unsustainable, drawing questions upon their other ratings, and casting doubt on the notion that issues as complex as nutritional value and social justice can be reduced to a single score. I questioned whether such "laser focus" transparency doesn't simply create a new opacity.
I must admit that in having some fun in the writing and some passion for the subject, my tone may have crossed the snarky line just a bit. Good Guide submitted a comment to my blog -- which, I venture to say, maybe also got a little close to the snarky line.
Here's the Good Guide response, delivered by Jodie -- I have taken the liberty to interlineate some comments in brackets and italics.
