But is it? I don't know about corn, but the mega-crop varieties of tomato and apple are bred to maximize revenue/reduce cost (larger, more robust for shipping, more consistent shape), not taste and nutrition.
I disagree; most of the produce at Whole Foods is mass-produced organic food, which is in between the quality of megafarm produce and small-farm produce.
But how objective is the difference between all these three? I have the impression most of the people who buy speciality crops wouldn't be able to tell the difference between them in most cases on a blind test.
Personally, I'm not sure I could tell in a blind test, though I'd like to think I could.
But, I do know that when I travel abroad (outside the US), the produce seems to taste better. Maybe it really does, or maybe it's just my own biases.
Regardless, we try to buy a substantial portion of our produce at farmers markets, when available (they aren't usually open in the winter months near DC).
There's a huge difference between different vegetables and fruits. But its probably due to selection of variety, not so much how its grown. Mass production limits what can be planted, according to what will survive the automated harvesting equipment and the trip to the store. So, tasteless tomatoes that are hard and picked green etc.
I have seen lot of comments on reddit about Europeans complaining that vegies from Dutch greenhouses don't taste good. I always wonder if then can differentiate if they did a blind taste.
