this post was submitted on 16 Feb 2026
688 points (99.3% liked)

Not The Onion

20425 readers
1074 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] InvalidName2@lemmy.zip 206 points 1 day ago (8 children)

I know this is preaching to the choir here, but that is so very out of touch for many/most/all of us.

Those things cost like $5 - $9 in my area, and you can even get the "old" ones for a couple dollars cheaper at times. It costs very little more than raw chicken, and in some cases, the rotisserie chickens cost less. Then you factor in time for cooking, clean-up, products for clean-up, and other time / material costs, and the difference comes out a wash.

So, they are apparently suggesting that having chicken in a meal at all is a splurge. Sure, in some idealistic world where we all eat a vegan diet to save the earth, that might fly. But in the real world, it's literally insane propaganda to suggest that chicken is a splurge.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 hours ago

trying to make us feel privileged for struggling and eating chicken. fuck these fascist pedo ghouls.

[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 90 points 1 day ago

These people writing these stories are probably ultra rich, and go to fine dining resteraunts. They probably pay $300 a meal for what you or I might pay $11 at the grocery store.

Then they think if THEY paid $300, then surely the non-privilaged must be paying $600. And they're doing it several times a week! Such splurge!

Meanwhile we could buy these things every day for a month for what they pay for 1 meal. And the quality realistically can't be all that much different. They probably assume they're eating a chicken thats twice as good, at half the cost.

But they don't know who we are! Say that name! Say it loud!!!

LEEEEEEEROOOOOYYYYYY

JEEEEEEEEENNNKKKKIIIIINNNNNSSSS!!!!!!

Least we got chicken....

[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 31 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The rotisserie chicken is in fact often a loss leader for grocery stores.

[–] AFKBRBChocolate@lemmy.ca 10 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Yes, though most of them use the chickens that are close to their sell-by date, so not a lot of loss,.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 hours ago

Also, below weight QC for raw chicken roasters

[–] ameancow@lemmy.world 28 points 1 day ago (1 children)

They know there's going to be pushback and people hollering and shouting how out of touch they are for printing it.

They don't care, they're just seeding the public narrative, trying to get people used to seeing the message in media that they should expect less and be content without things.

It's not how we feel about the article today, it's about the kids and young people growing up seeing this message as normal.

[–] tempest@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 day ago

It's just rage bait. You don't need to read into it any more than that

[–] RampantParanoia2365@lemmy.world 2 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

And rotisserie chicken is tasty, filling because it's high protein, and healthy/low calorie.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca -3 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

The Costco ones are brined in all kinds of chemicals.

[–] Taldan@lemmy.world 5 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

The chemicals: water, salt, rice starch, sugar, vegetable oil, tetrapotassium pyrophosphate, sodium triphosphate

Nothing concerning in that list, although the last two sound scary when if don't know what they are

[–] abs_mess@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Chemicals in this case is another one of those vague amorphous things to be scared of, right up until you know what it is... Could be anything really, baking soda, 5G mind control powder, dusted Bin Laden, your aunties fingernails.

Everything in the world is chemical, including all your natural GMO free organic foods, got that adenosine triphosphate, cellulose, chlorophyll, dihydrogen monoxide.

Gonna go around scaring people by telling them I've been buying skewered avian carcasses to eat instead of beef, and showing them a rotisserie chicken.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Or just get educated and look at the list of shit they put in the chicken. Your choice.

[–] Gigasser@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

Costco chicken ingredients: chicken, water, salt, sodium phosphates, hydrolyzed casein, modified corn starch, sugar, dextrose, chicken broth, isolated soy protein lecithin, and mono-and-diglycerides.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 0 points 9 hours ago

salt, sodium phosphate, modified food starch, potato dextrin, carrageenan, sugar, dextrose, and undisclosed spice extractives.

tetrapotassium pyrophosphate

Used in instant puddings, seafood, poultry, and dairy products to improve texture, emulsion, and stability. It is used to enhance protein solubility and moisture retention in pet food.

Functions as a cleaner and dispersant in paint, textiles, and water treatment. It acts as a surfactant in detergents.

While generally considered safe in low concentrations for food, it can cause skin and eye irritation.

Sodium Triphosphate: Industrial Uses: Primarily used in detergents to soften water, in water treatment, and as a stabilizer in industrial processes. Food Industry: Used in processed foods to improve texture, act as an emulsifier, and retain moisture in seafood (e.g., shrimp).

Why not just roast a chicken with some herbs, I can definitely taste that shit.

[–] themaninblack@lemmy.world 9 points 22 hours ago

We are regressing back to “a chicken in every pot”.

[–] 1dalm@lemmings.world 30 points 1 day ago

And "old" in this case means "cooked this morning".

[–] Solventbubbles@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I can also add, as a vegetarian myself, a vegan diet is nowhere near as cheap.

Unless you have the ability to grow all your own produce and protein, vegans are spending just as much if not more for those calories/proteins.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 hours ago

You'll save on medical bills in the long run. Meat eaters get far more chronic diseases

[–] teslekova@sh.itjust.works 8 points 21 hours ago

Well, you can live on rice and beans pretty well, and simple salad is cheap. But yes, I agree. Vegans pay more than vegetarians, because milk and eggs are cheap.