PressEthic

Consumers at Chinese restaurants in Austin, Texas will get a surprise when they crack open their fortune cookies to discover, in addition to the expected prophecy, a political advertisement, explained an article in the Washington Post Sunday:

At Chinese restaurants across Austin last week, diners cracked open their desserts and found that their fortunes held love, riches and a bond initiative. Instead of the usual lucky numbers was the message "Vote Nov. 7 for Prop 4/Invest in Austin's Creative Economy." Call it a new PAC -- political action cookie.

Consumers are the target of a guerrilla campaign to make the public aware of Proposition 4, which "includes $5 million for an Asian-American Resource Center that will host community and cultural events." However, restaurants were not notified that the fortune cookies they received would carry the political messages, and some complained. The tactic is also problematic because, the article states:

The cookies don't say who paid for the ad, and that omission could violate the Texas election code. But Tim Sorrells, deputy general counsel for the Texas Ethics Commission, said his office will look into the cookie caper only if a complaint is filed. Cheng shrugged off any potential controversy. "Nobody really cares," he said. "Half of the people didn't know what the proposition's about. At least now they're becoming inquisitive about it."

An article in the Austin-American Statesman on October 10, 2006 described:

Manager Shawn Diep said many restaurants that bought the cookies did not know about the political message inside.

"We had a couple of customers that didn't want a political thing in their cookies, so we switched them to the regular ones," he said. "But mainly, we haven't heard many complaints."

An official with the Texas Ethics Commission, which oversees election laws, said it's not clear whether the advertising cookies follow state election laws. The political ads don't specify who paid for them, which is required except for circulars and fliers that cost less than $500 to distribute.

"We've never looked at this, so I can't say the law is crystal clear," said Tim Sorrells, deputy general counsel for the commission.

Perhaps in this particular situation, the chances of resistance to the political cookies is slim. However, what if the message inside the cookie had been a more controversial one? Shouldn't restaurants have a say in what types of messages their patrons receive, or at least be made aware in advance? Or is this just a really clever way for political activists and advertisers alike to reach a captive audience?

While there are no provisions detailing election laws in Texas with regard to fortune cookies in political campaigns, exceptions have been made in the past for nail files, buttons, etc. The problem would arise, it seems, if consumers began to associate the establishment where they received the fortune with the actual message. Restaurants could be perceived as having specific political agendas that they may not even ascribe to, or, for that matter, realize that they are disseminating. In this particular instance, those behind the creative cookies got just what they wanted: a buzz.