A report by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) condemns government authorities for ignoring global exploitation of tuna. The magnitude of the problem was found in 2007 when France hauled in almost double its allowed quota.

The report details systematic over-fishing, falsely reported catch volumes, ignored bans of spotter planes to track down schools of tuna and illegal sales of national quotas from one vessel to another.

All told, the investigation paints a bleak picture in which thousands of tons of fish were illegally hauled between 1998 and 2007 – as many as one in every three bluefin tuna may have been caught illegally during this period.

Reasons for the illegal trade are said to be obvious.

As marine biologist, Daniel Pauly told the ICIJ, the promise of a slice of such wealth is too enticing for many to resist.

“Fisheries are one of the most criminalized sectors in the world,” Pauly said. “This generates so much money that it’s like drugs.”

The report said the black market trade in tuna was worth at least $4 billion (2.9 billion euros) between 1998 and 2007.

Tuna populations have been devastated by the practice. Quotas have been ignored, if not difficult to monitor, and regulators are facing a tough situation. The World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) has suggested a simple answer — drop quotas to something very easy to monitor that also may be necessary to save the species — zero.

A “trading standards” operation in Ireland used ‘Pretend’ drunks to catch out Conwy and Denbighshire pubs serving alcohol illegally.

Roly Schwarz, community safety enforcement manager for both authority areas, said they used three professional witnesses to act out the drunken display as all the tradings standards officers are so well known in the area.

Sounds like a case of “everyone act normal, the auditors are here.”

He said: “On one of the occasions we actually dressed one of them as Frank Gallagher, the very dishevelled main character in the series Shameless and had him trying to buy a drink in character with change and smelling of drink and he was still served.

“We also had them knocking over furniture, falling over, telling staff they had been drinking all day and walking in and out of places.

“We were very surprised by the findings as we went along and decided to up the anti, with them acting more and more drunk and always making sure they told anyone who listened they had been drinking all day.”

I can only imagine what “up the anti” looked like on Facebook the next day.

About 45% (11 of 25) failed to stop serving. The trading standards officer suggests to the BBC that stopping the practice of selling to drunks will help reduce other crimes.

The Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood is not happy with Scholastic. They are asking everyone concerned to send a message: Stop the in-school SunnyD sugar spree. The problem stems from how SunnyD is said to raise funds by using social engineering tactics.

Sweetened by high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS), an 8-ounce serving of SunnyD contains a whopping 20 grams of sugar. Its orange hue comes from Yellow #5 and Yellow #6, two artificial colors that contain known carcinogens and can cause allergies and hyperactivity in children. But that’s not stopping Scholastic from partnering with SunnyD to market beverages laden with HFCS to a captive audience of schoolchildren in preschool and elementary classrooms around the country. As part of the “SunnyD Book Spree,” students are asked to collect SunnyD labels and teachers are encouraged to throw SunnyD parties in their classrooms — in exchange for 20 free Scholastic books.

SunnyD could instead sell their product directly to consumers with a note that they will donate a portion of profit for books. This makes sense as a direct manufacturer-to-consumer relationship. However, a product relationship proxied through a captive audience of school children “ambassadors” is suspicious. A company can donate funds and materials directly if they choose this as their mission; children in a classroom should not be made to promote products as a kind of indenture.

It sounds to me as though SunnyD does not believe their product is able to sell on its own merits so they are trying to use pull sympathy for kids into the equation, or they just hope to get children hooked on their product. Either way they are using an attack path to exploit consumer vulnerabilities through social engineering tactics. It is not only bad for the health of the market but also the health of children.