nosh nook #78 - wednesday, july 1, 2009

critics cringe at ad for burger king's latest sandwich (link)
06.30.09 - fox news - by joshua rhett miller

over the past decade, burger king's really been vying for our attention by putting their all into creating some of the wildest & craziest fast food marketing campaigns around. a few years back, they launched the subservient chicken website, which totally went viral. they created a campaign on facebook that rewarded people with a whopper if they removed ten friends from their friend list. late last year, they released a body spray that smelled like meat. now, as part of a limited time promotion in singapore for the "bk super seven incher," they've released an ad that's topped them all in terms of its shock value.

...& if you're fox news, burger king has gone too far. the ad "shows the 'mind-blowing' sandwich near the open mouth of a wide-eyed, red-lipsticked woman accompanied by the suggestive tagline: 'it'll blow your mind away.'" as always, when fox news thinks that somebody's gone too far, they've launched what's obviously a "fair & balanced" investigation into the matter & gone to "advertising experts" to get their "fair & balanced" opinions. who are these advertising experts? blogger & ad copywriter mark duffy, scott purvis of the marketing & advertising firm gallup & robinson and mark crispin miller, an nyu professor of media studies. they were all totally shocked & appalled.

their complaints? duffy said it's "among the "worst" he's ever seen in more than 17 years" and noted that since the woman's face in the ad & the sandwich appear retouched, "they obviously didn’t hire a top-notch food photographer." purvis felt that it went too far & is "the kind of ad you might see for a smaller brand trying to get itself noticed." mark crispin miller was quoted as saying that "this is objectionable because it's outrageously exaggerating the pleasure of burger king. it's not that good, even as food, and therefore nowhere near as gratifying as an orgasm. there's no doubt they intended a double entrendre (sp)."  really? burger king's not as good as an orgasm? there's no doubt that they intended a double entendre? i can see why he's a professor...the dude's obviously a genius.

i'm not saying that objectifying women in a fast food ad is a good thing, but it isn't really any different than many other ads out there.  it's just being more blatant in its sexual connotations. plus, as a burger king spokeswoman said in the article, "this print ad is running to support a limited time promotion in the singapore market and is not running in the u.s. or any other markets. the campaign is supported by the franchisee in singapore." it's a limited time promotion in singapore, people. get over it.  that is, unless fox news has already got you all riled up about it, in which case you should probably turn off fox news, get off your couch, scribble up a sign & go to your local burger king to demand that they pull the ad...& since it's not running anywhere in the u.s., a swift victory will be yours.

nosh nook #77 - tuesday, june 30, 2009

selling “junkless junk food” to the masses (link)
06.29.09 - the ny times - by stuart elliott

if you're a snack manufacturer & you're looking to succeed these days, the best way to do so is to put out healthy snacks, since the tide's clearly turned & folks are all up in arms about junk food. hell, you can't even get a super-sized meal at mcdonalds any more. one company who's trying to take advantage of this desire for healthy snacks is popchips, who i wrote about back in april. their chips aren't like any other chip on the market. they're not fried. they're not baked. they're friggin popped...& that equals healthiness, folks.

as stuart elliott reports for the ny times' media & advertising section, popchips has developed a $1.3 million dollar ad campaign designed to let consumers know that they have the healthy snack folks have been looking for. the campaign consists of "extensive outdoor advertising; a web site along with presences on facebook, twitter and youtube; an e-mail newsletter; ads on the video screens in taxi cabs; a sampling program with its own “mobile snack tour,” with a goal of giving away 500,000 bags of popchips; public relations by formula PR in new york; and an outreach to trend-setters that seeks to generate positive buzz." um, popchips? hello? i have a snack blog, am following you on twitter & am totally a trend-setter. hook me up. i'll "positive buzz" the hell out of your chips.

as a snacker, popchips CEO keith belling believes that "snacking is not a serious thing" & wants to "bring the fun back to snacking," so for the campaign, they reached out to san fran's pereira & o'dell, who have also developed a purple shoe for yahoo & a legos campaign entitled "go miniman go," or as it reads in the website's url--"go mini mango." mmm. mini mangos. with popchips, since pereira & o'dell are clearly advertising geniuses, they've developed slogans like "sandwich. meet your new b.f.f." & "snack. smile. repeat."  clever.  p.j. pereira, CEO of the company, is quoted as saying that the campaign "is meant to signal that popchips 'is a simple revolution in the chips world.'" like i said before...that revolution starts with me.  hook me up, popchips.  i have a lot of free time on my hands. don't make me stalk your popchips mobile truck when it comes to town.

nosh nook #43 - wednesday, may 13, 2009

when ‘local’ makes it big (link)
05.12.09 - the ny times - by kim severson

if there's one thing that big business likes doing, it's co-opting stuff. as long as you can be one of the first to cash in on the latest trend, even if it's with a mediocre facsimile, you're golden, much like a pair of arches. take the grunge look. that is so not cool any more. the fashion industry wore that out quicklike. on a related note, for every nirvana, there were ten candleboxes. anyway, now, since we americans are so fickle, buying organic foods has moved out of the spotlight & being a locavore (buying locally) has stepped in to become the hip new food trend. it doesn't hurt that the word "locavore" sounds wolflike or at the very least, something with fangs. the big food corporations are already lining up to cash in.

kim severson really breaks it down quite well for the ny times in her story. yesterday, the NYSE had five potato farmers ring the bell in lockstep with a lays (frito lay/pepsi) marketing campaign aimed at promoting the localness of their potato chips. basically, they're airing spots in each of the five farmers' home states, explaining how they grow potatoes there & lays makes potato chips there, so it's local. then the ads go national soon after, promoting the idea to the entire country. apparently frito-lay has a "sustainability program" also...how quaint. hunts (conagra) has also jumped on board, promoting the proximity of their tomato farms to their cali processing plants. if they can promote that to local consumers, there's a good chance they'll buy, since they have a clear picture of the distribution chain.  it's all about how you spin it.

i am all for locally grown food, co-ops getting veggies & whatnot from local farms...our little socialist colonies. i've seen king corn & i'm hip to the evils of the huge, guvment sponsored, commodity crop farms. i'm assuming that guvment money has something to do with pepsi wanting to merge with frito-lay in the first place. hell, i'd get in bed for what's probably trickling down to them.

the spread of the locavore mentality isn't all evil. as severson explains, in central cali, there's a "grow & buy local" initiative, which is taking part of a county grant & urging farmers to replace commodity crops with grocery crops, which can fill local needs & farm stands. trickle-down!  she spoke with the director of guv relations for the virginia farm bureau, who said, "if promoting local agriculture will help america to become food independent, that’s what we want."  i agree.  as a non-practicing locavore, other than the freshness of my foods, shifting dependence to local sources is the main reason i have for wishing i bought entirely locally.  all i can say is, hopefully there's a potato farmer in my state so i can get me some local lays real soon.

nosh nook #38 - wednesday, may 6, 2009

renewed calls for junk food ad ban on kids’ TV (link)
05.05.09 - australian food news - by daniel palmer

sometimes it seems like the whole world is against you. if you're junk food, that time is now. you're a plague upon our children. you're a pox on our houses. you're a thorn in our side & therefore must be eradicated post haste. won't somebody please think of the children?  if you're junk food, fighting the evil that your tastiness spreads has now become a pet project for politicians from new york to the u.k. to australia. you're bad. you're bad. really really bad.

according to daniel palmer, from the australian food news, down under, the coalition of food advertising to children (CFAC) "believe(s) that children who watch two hours of television per day see 18 hours per year of unhealthy advertisements for food like chips, burgers, confectionery and soft drinks." as a result, they're urging a ban on unhealthy food ads during the hours children watch TV. according to the president of the australian medical association, "(f)ood advertising influences what food children want, ask for, and eat." obviously, the answer is to ban advertising, as their parents are powerless when it comes to steering their children toward healthy diets.

how has the australian food industry reacted? they're playing nice & have even gone as far as to create a "responsible children’s marketing initiative," which says that they'll only advertise healthy food option to kids under twelve. once they're thirteen, they're fair game. last year, the australian green party introduced legislation aimed at curbing junk food advertising, but it didn't get enough support to pass. luckily, this year, they've reintroduced legislation. at the moment, it's poised to fail, but once the preventative health taskforce comes back in june with recommendations for australia's health policy, that could change...& not soon enough, because the little boy pictured in the article appears to be enjoying his donut more than should be allowed by law.