Hidden Marketing Ads There are many companies that use misleading advertisements to increase marketing sales. It can range from the foods we eat to our drinks. According to Tufts University and Health Nutrition letter, the phrase “all natural” is the third most popular claim on US food products. It appeals to consumers that they are drinking something healthy. What many of these companies regrets to inform are the false ingredients used to persuade buyers into thinking some products are all natural. However, the ingredients used are actually artificial flavors such as high fructose syrup. Ultimately, the misleading “all natural” labels and hidden messages in marketing ads disregards consumer’s expectations, and harms consumer’s health. A documentary, Food Inc., is a prime example of what food industries don’t want you to see in order to make their business successful and increase sales. The section of the film discusses the hidden secrets behind slaughter houses, pesticides, factories and farmlands. These industries keep the truth hidden mainly because of the fear of consumers not wanting to eat their product if they knew what they were really eating and how it was processed. Although, the documentary favors a one sided viewpoint, it does expose consumers a …show more content…
CADS reported, a 2007 lawsuit against Snapple claiming that their products contained all natural ingredients. However, it contained synthetic ingredients such as, high fructose corn syrup and aspartame (Goulet). A major ingredient in Snapple’s drinks is high fructose corn syrup. A processed sweetener that is common in many other food products yet does not exist in nature. According to the American Diabetes Association, sugar consumption and high fructose corn syrup has risen over forty percent since the 1950’s. The intake of these sugar drinks has been associated with obesity and other detrimental health
Adverts often mask foods that are unhealthy by emphasising its positive nutritional features – such as dietary fibre and protein. While at the same time ignoring its negative features – including the high amounts of saturated fat and sugar contents. In some cases, even products that mention any alleged health benefits are usually are outweighed by the health risks associated with consuming the product, that they just fail to
Moreover, this system of mass farming leads to single crop farms, which are ecologically unsafe, and the unnatural treatment of animals (Kingsolver 14). These facts are presented to force the reader to consider their own actions when purchasing their own food because of the huge economic impact that their purchases can have. Kingsolver demonstrates this impact by stating that “every U.S. citizen ate just one meal a week (any meal) composed of locally and organically raised meats and produce, we
Recently, another weight loss supplement has stepped into the ever-increasing market. This drug, called Stimulife 750, is a supposedly all-natural herbal supplement that promotes weight loss without any effort from the client. Both the parent company – Stimulife International – and various distributors of Stimulife 750 make bold blanket statements such as “Stimulife 750 has everything good and nothing bad,” which set the success of the pill far higher than is possible. Furthermore, these individuals attempting to sell the product use a variety of marketing techniques to encourage purchasing the supplement; however, they provide no scientific evidence to support the claims they make regarding the safety and effectiveness of the product. By appealing to the clients’ desire for a natural and easy way to lose weight, providing pseudo-scientific statements to convey a sense of authenticity to the product, and befriending the client by seeming to care for their best interests, the distributers attempt to woo more clients. However, Stimulife 750 contains many ingredients included in other “unsafe” weight loss supplements and scientific research shows no clear evidence that Stimulife 750 is any more effective or safe as other diet pills.
In recent years, it is not even necessary to turn on the news to hear about the bad reputation farming has been getting in recent years. What with the media focusing on things like drugs in animals and Pink Slime, or Lean Finely Textured Beef, it is a wonder that people are eating “non-organic” foods. However, many pro-farming organizations having been trying to fight back against these slanders. Still, the battle is not without heavy competition, and a good portion of it comes from Chipotle, a fast food Mexican restaurant that claims to only use completely organic ingredients in their food. Chipotle is constantly introducing advertisements claiming to have the natural ingredients while slandering the name of farmers everywhere. Perhaps the most well-known is “The Scarecrow,” a three minute ad that features some of the most haunting images Chipotle has ever featured. While “The Scarecrow” uses tear-inducing images and the almost eerie music to entice the audience to the company’s “free-range farming” ideals, it lacks substantial logos yet, it still
Tyson Foods has entered millions of homes in America and is seen as a convenient, healthy form of sustenance. This company portrays itself as a family company, that provides safe food for a growing world population; however, it is in fact contaminated and filled with deceit, deception, and fraudulence. Tyson vocalizes that it has the consumer’s best interest in mind, meanwhile its sole interest is its revenue. It manufactures second-rate chicken byproducts and disguises it as a healthy choice for families. It has been discovered that Tyson distributes contaminated foods, injects its products with antibiotics, and abuses its livestock; thus, society needs to prohibit such rancid foods from entering its homes and being fed to its children, and to put an end to the corrupt company’s empirical power.
With regulations being set and laws enacted, the United States has seen a change for the better within the food industry and for the consumers overall. As a result, as much as a company is willing to cut on cost, without the consumers, every business in any industry will become bankrupt. The power is in the consumer and as long as consumers are educated properly and willing to speak up, there is a bright future ahead. However, because not everything can be seen, it is important to have books such as The Jungle and authors like Upton Sinclair to let people know what is going on and what not everyone is able to see. In doing so, this will raise awareness, create transparency and demand that companies practice ethically for the betterment of the
In her book Marion Nestle examines many aspects of the food industry that call for regulation and closer examination. Nestle was a member of the Food Advisory Committee to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the 1990’s and therefore helps deem herself as a credible source of information to the audience. (Nestle 2003). Yet, with her wealth of knowledge and experience she narrates from a very candid and logical perspective, but her delivery of this knowled...
In Wendell Berry’s “The Pleasures of Eating,” this farmer tells eaters how their separation from food production has turned them into “passive consumers” who know nothing about the food they eat, or their part in the agricultural process (3). They are blindsided by a food industry that does not help them understand. Berry argues that the average consumer buys available food without any questions. He states consumers that think they are distanced from agriculture because they can easily buy food, making them ignorant of cruel conditions it went through to get on the shelf. Humans have become controlled by the food industry, and regard eating as just something required for their survival. Berry wants this to change as people realize they should get an enjoyment from eating that can only come from becoming responsible for their food choices and learning more about what they eat. While describing the average consumer’s ignorance and the food industry’s deceit, he effectively uses appeals to emotion, logic, and values to persuade people to take charge, and change how they think about eating.
Alice Waters, in her 2007 article “Farmer Bill Should Focus on Healthful Foods”, instead of focusing on the farming techniques themselves, makes a more pointed inspection over the products and produce
Companies nowadays are using different and strong methods in marketing their food products. The Companies are very competitive, and the results can affect the people. When we think about this job field, it is convincing that those producers should use cleverly ways to gain their own living. In the other side they shouldn’t use misleading ways that could harm the people. Food companies should be straightforward with every marketing method they use. People have the right to know what they are consuming and also to know the effects of these products on them, whether it is harmful, useful, or even neutral.
We all see numerous advertisements everyday and think nothing of them. Instead of reading through them we just look at them for what they are, maybe colorful, full of fun and catchy words or phrases, and pictures plastered on billboards, in magazines, newspapers, etc. From listening to my english instructor I realized that ads are advertising a lot more than they claim to be, especially ones about alcohol. In my essay about "false advertisements" I've elaborated on how ads about alcohol are sending subliminal messages to certain groups of people in society. It was somewhat hard to explain the messages behind the ads, but once they are understood it's surprsing to see what's been discovered!
Due to false advertising, I feel that certain food companies are being careless in trying to make people buy their products in order to make money in the quickest way possible. My only suggestions for this situation are either the companies to tell the truth about their products, or stop advertising completely. If the companies could spend more time researching the effects of their products, then they could make improvements to their foods or maybe find alternatives to the ingredients. That way people can make the right decisions in buying what is best for them and their children. Thank you for your time.
More and More people are becoming concerned about what they eat, especially if they consume food products that are manufactured in food industries. However, it is hard to know what exactly you are consuming if food industries provide false nutrition content and mislead consumers by placing false advertisements on the packaging. When a company produces a product that contains misleading label, consumers are not receiving complete information about the food they are eating which could lead to health issues including allergies and problems with diabetes.
Hershey’s and Quaker are two well established brands in the snack food world. The weight of their names carry a specific ethos; a persona that will influence the consumer to buy their product, as it is a name that the customer trusts. Two advertisements are analyzed, both found in a February 2007 edition of People magazine: Hershey’s Extra Dark Chocolate and Quaker True Delight print advertisements. The main connection between these two prints is rather apparent: they are both snack foods, and they contain dark chocolate. However, both prints, as they are introducing a new product line, paint a new image of their merchandise: this snack food is healthy, ergo this creation should be chosen over all other products. Hershey’s Extra Dark Chocolate utilizes a cause-and-effect strategy by outlining that consuming their dark chocolate will improve cardiovascular health, backed by the logic and ethos of a study performed by a well-known university. Quaker’s True Delights, however, emphasizes the fact that their product tastes fantastic and is low in calories, in addition to using their ethos of their brand. Ultimately, both products utilize their established persona to draw
This book is a life changing book. It was inspirational, informative and gave you insight about the things we do not know about the food we eat. The documentary was graphic and detailed, informing you of the process from the farm or the fields, to the manufactures, to the labeling and packaging companies. It informed me, about the school lunches, how some of the meals at school are made, to the politics behind it. This book is also a collectible.