In today’s fast-paced world, where social media dominates our lives and image is everything, it’s no surprise that the food industry has fallen victim to the allure of advertising. Consumers are bombarded daily with images of mouth-watering burgers, delicious pizzas, and tantalizing desserts. However, what they receive when they order these products often falls short of their expectations. The recent news of Burger King customers in the US taking the company to court over their misleading food advertising has shone a spotlight on this issue.
For many consumers like Chris from south London, the difference between what is advertised and what is served is staggering. Chris, like many others, has found himself sending pictures of his disappointing meals to friends and fellow burger lovers, highlighting the stark contrast between the two. This discrepancy leaves customers feeling ripped off and deceived, but many choose to swallow their disappointment rather than embarrass themselves by complaining.
Burger King has defended its advertising practices, stating that their burgers do not have to look “exactly like the picture”, and that the products featured in their advertising materials are the same ones served to guests across the UK. However, disgruntled customers argue that the gap between the image and reality stretches credulity. They point to examples such as ice cream with whole almonds being served with only shavings, meager pizza toppings, and overpriced yet pitiful salads.
Amy Wardle, head of a New York and Philadelphia-based food styling company, sheds light on the methods used in food advertising. While there are guidelines that food pictures should only display ingredients that are actually in the product, there is still room for manipulation. For example, sponges can be placed between slices of bread to give the sandwich a fuller look, a slice of pizza may require extra cheese taken from multiple identical pizzas to achieve the right “cheese pull” effect, and cereal can be pictured in a bowl of glue instead of milk to prevent sogginess. Burgers in advertising often have toothpick scaffolding to stabilize the bun and prevent it from sliding off the mayonnaise. Wardle emphasizes that she uses genuine ingredients and meticulous techniques to present the best possible version of the product in advertising.
So, how is this legal? Mark Bartholomew, a professor of law, explains that while there are no specific rules against these techniques in the US, the images should not misrepresent the product. In the US court case against Burger King, the judge has dismissed claims regarding the company’s advertising images, only allowing claims about in-store images to be heard. This ruling suggests that images at the point-of-sale, such as on menus or in-store displays, may be subject to closer scrutiny as they are considered part of a contract between the customer and the company.
However, Bartholomew points out that cases based on allegedly misleading images have rarely succeeded, mainly due to the subjective nature of perception. The US Federal Trade Commission also rarely intervenes in these types of cases. In the UK, the regulations are slightly stricter, with the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) responsible for policing promotional images. The ASA requires firms to provide evidence that their images accurately represent the product and bans ads that are found to be misleading.
The impact of misleading food advertising extends beyond just disappointing meals. It erodes consumer trust in brands and damages their reputation. When customers feel like they have been deceived, they are less likely to return or recommend the brand to others. Companies should take pride in their actual products and strive for transparency in their advertising. By delivering what is promised in their promotional images, they can uphold consumer trust and build long-lasting relationships with their customers.
As consumers, we should be cautious when interpreting food advertising. While tempting images can create cravings and influence our choices, it is essential to manage our expectations and recognize that advertising often employs exaggeration and embellishment. By being informed and aware, we can make more informed decisions and hold companies accountable for the representations they make in their advertising campaigns.
In conclusion, the recent news about Burger King customers taking legal action over the disparity between advertised food and reality highlights the impact of misleading food advertising. It raises concerns about the honesty and transparency of the food industry and the erosion of consumer trust. While guidelines exist regarding misleading advertising, their enforcement varies across different regions. As consumers, we need to approach food advertising with caution and demand transparency from companies. Only by holding brands accountable can we create a marketplace that truly delivers on its promises.
