Taco Bell Marketing

[Anonymous No.16603180]

Why does every single ad for Taco Bell mention their sour cream is reduced-fat? I myself buy full fat sour cream and assume the taste is superior. I also assume Taco Bell is using reduced fat not because of any health reasons but because milkfat is an expensive commodity and buying vast quantities of reduced-fat sour cream is simply cheaper.

Would they get in trouble if they simply said "sour cream" in their advertising efforts?

[Anonymous No.16603181]

>>16603180
>Would they get in trouble if they simply said "sour cream" in their advertising efforts?
Yes

[Anonymous No.16603189]

Because it makes fat idiots feel better about their poor decisions

[Anonymous No.16603191]

>>16603181
With who? What law are they violating?

>>16603189
Naw, milkfat isn't cheap, especially when ur not buying sour cream by the ton, I'd imagine reduced fat is significantly cheaper.

[Anonymous No.16603204]

>>16603191
Probably the FDA or USDA. They could get fined.

[Anonymous No.16603211]

>>16603204
But why? What rule does it directly violate? Has any other company been fined for such a thing?

It still IS sour cream! It is weird to make them have to say reduced fat in every single ad as if there is some huge difference between 18% and 13.5% milkfat and customers would be swindled if they thought otherwise.

[Anonymous No.16603229]

>>16603180
Call the Taco-Bell quality control hotline and ask them.

[Anonymous No.16603236]

>>16603211
Food fraud. Mislabeling food products is against the law. Even misleading consumers falls under this.
Yes, companies are fined for these things.

[Anonymous No.16603317]

>>16603236
But it still is sour cream. How is it fraudulent to simply not add irrelevant details like it being reduced fat?

>Mislabeling food products is against the law.

they aren't labeling it.. just saying out loud "hurr taco comes with sour cream"

[Anonymous No.16603326]

>>16603317
Reduced fat sure as shit isn't an irrelevant detail to many people.

[Anonymous No.16603331]

>>16603317
Well you point out in previous posts that it is relevant. There is a price premium for higher fat sour creams.
Saying reduced-fat ensures they're not misleading customers into thinking they're getting a more expensive product.

Food labeling and advertising laws are extremely pedantic.

[Anonymous No.16603346]

>>16603326
What exactly is so important about a 4.5% difference in milkfat? Still sour cream, still the same basic fundamental product.

>>16603331
I don't think most customers are consciously processing the price of minor ingredients. It is just an extra hassle to say in the advertising and makes it clunky and awkward.

[Anonymous No.16603349]

I used to work at Qdoba and to make “light” sour cream we would just take the regular stuff and mix it with water.

[Anonymous No.16603355]

>>16603349
Were they offered separately as distinct options for customers?

[Anonymous No.16603362]

>>16603346
>I don't think most customers are consciously processing the price of minor ingredients.
Nope, probably not. But that's irrelevant to the law.

[Anonymous No.16603363]

>>16603326
>Uhhmmm can I get uhhhh 3 bic macs, 2 large fry, dozen nuggets and uhhh large DIET coke, I am trying to watch my weight.

[Anonymous No.16603374]

>>16603362
You have yet to point to a statute that would explicitly criminalize offering reduced-fat sour cream simply as sour cream.

[Anonymous No.16603433]

>>16603355
The light sour cream was for putting on burritos and nachos, the regular stuff was firm so we could put a scoop next to a quesadilla. The customer could get whatever they wanted but if they said nothing that’s what they got.

[Anonymous No.16603441]

>>16603317
I work for a restaurant chain in Canada. We also have to mention our light mayo specifically on any menu items or we get a boot up the ass. They're strict on that shit.

[Anonymous No.16603503]

>>16603374
there is no law specific to sour cream,just general food labeling laws

[Anonymous No.16603504]

>>16603441
Well, I am talking about America and we have this thing here, you may not be aware of, called FREEDOM.

[Anonymous No.16603509]

>>16603191
>what are labeling laws?
>what are food definitions?
Dumbfuck

[Anonymous No.16603535]

>>16603509
im talking about ads - not food labels

give me an instance a single one of a company being fined for something as trivial as calling reduced fat sour cream just sour cream

it still is sour cream

[Anonymous No.16603546]

>>16603535
>it still is sour cream
No, dumbass, legally speaking, it is not.
https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?fr=131.160

[Anonymous No.16603558]

>>16603546
>https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?fr=131.160

I don't see where that specifically would state that reduced fat sour cream is not sour cream and cannot be advertised as such, to be clear I am only talking about ads, not food labels themselves.

[Anonymous No.16603563]

>>16603558
Ads are labels. Sour cream is defined as having at least 18 percent fat. Less than that and it is not legally sour cream.
You are fucking retarded. I hope your nuts contain no sperm.

[Anonymous No.16603571]

>>16603563
reduced fat sour cream is what then?

ads are not labels, you are not buying raw material you are buying assembled products - each component is labeled accurately in nutrition information sure, but why a video or tv ad needs to mention it - in an assuredly awkward fashion- as being reduced fat is beyond me

still haven't seen a single example of a company being fined for something so trivial

>in nutrition information mention it is reduced fat

>in the short space of a 30 second ad just call it sour cream

who is being hurt by that?

[Anonymous No.16603572]

anyone else think it's weird that it's illegal to call reduced fat sour cream just "sour cream" but it's ok to still call something that's 51% beef and 49% soy "beef"

[Anonymous No.16603582]

>>16603572
just give me a single example of a company being fined for calling reduced fat sour cream sour cream in an ad!

>hurr dats illegal

then surely theres a single example of said laws being enforced...

[Anonymous No.16603593]

>>16603571
Reduced fat sour cream is just that. A food item known as "reduced fat sour cream" which is entirely different from actual "sour cream."
> something so trivial
Probably because A) they're smart enough (unlike your dumb mother fucking ass) to label things correctly, or, B) because the FDA has a lengthy warnings process designed to bring compliance rather than fines.

You are a fucking moron.

[Anonymous No.16603595]

>>16603317
Because there's a difference between 2% and Whole milk you dumb retard you cant just say "milk". Reduced fat sour cream is different than regular sour cream

[Anonymous No.16603599]

>>16603572
The beef industry has better lobbyists than the dairy industry

[Anonymous No.16603601]

>>16603593
>entirely different
>slightly less fat
>tastes extremely similar

Is a consumer led to believe something other than sour cream is in their taco when a company uses reduced fat sour cream?

No

Is the taste and texture substantially similar?

Yes

>>16603595
>you can't just say milk

yes you can?

[Anonymous No.16603616]

>>16603346
The law says people must be informed about food
>but who thinks about that
Obviously you autismo

[Anonymous No.16603620]

>>16603601
>Um yes you can sweaty
>source my ass

[Anonymous No.16603621]

>>16603601
Please stop. Food is regulated. Look into the history of the Pure Food and Drug act.

I'm done. You are a thick-headed moron of rare quality. Please don't spawn. Please don't vote. Please don't ever try to teach anyone anything.

[Anonymous No.16603626]

>>16603616
In the course of a short 30 second ad, what great relevance does the minor distinction between 13.5 and 18% soured cream have? Its not like they list the fat percentage of any other ingredient used like the cheese or beef - just seems like a weird jargon pressure

as stated before - you can still put that in the nutrition information, customers looking for that info are probably going to check the nutrition information

[Anonymous No.16603633]

>>16603621
Ok and give me a SINGLE, just one example of a company being fined for advertising reduced fat sour cream as simply sour cream

it ruins their advertising and makes it clunky and they would be better off just saying sour cream

[Anonymous No.16603647]

>>16603626
Beef has varying fat levels to a degree which most consumers expect to be subjective to the business and the fat is not a crucial ingredient to the product known as beef as the beef fat can and does exist separate of the beef. As for cheese, the cheese is not reduced fat, if it was it would need to be labeled as such. The sour cream is not what the FDA would consider regular sour cream, it is low fat, meaning a portion of what makes the product sour cream has been removed altering the makeup of the product, such that it is best to label it for the consumer.

[Anonymous No.16603661]

>>16603626
https://www.cancer.org/healthy/eat-healthy-get-active/take-control-your-weight/understanding-food-labels.html
You are stupid

[Anonymous No.16603662]

>>16603647
>beef with 0% fat content would not be noticed by consumers

>somehow 14 vs 18% fat sour cream is an essential, substantive difference that cannot be glossed over in a short 30 second video advertisement

reduced fat sour cream - is sour cream - an essential component of its existence, is being sour cream

2% milk - still milk

70% lean beef - beef

90% lean beef - beef

18% sour cream - sour cream

14% sour cream - *autistic screeching*

[Anonymous No.16603671]

>>16603633

https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/guidance-industry-food-labeling-guide

Here is the guide retard, also if you have access to a law library with a list of cases be my guest. Good look finding one because cases like that are not highly publicized and exist only in legal records accessible most easily by clerks and lawyers.

[Anonymous No.16603672]

>>16603633
>it ruins their advertising
in your autistic opinion, which is not the only opinion. Most people sliding thru the app may see reduced fat and it triggers something in their animal brain that helps them justify eating unhealthy fast food. literally have you never heard of a fatty justifying eating a tub of ice cream by saying "it's reduced fat tee-hee!"

[Anonymous No.16603676]

>>16603662
Use different product that requires labeling
>you
>autistic screeching

[Anonymous No.16603685]

>>16603671
so you cannot point to a single example of a company facing consequences for labeling reduced fat sour cream simply as sour cream in an ad

and

we have
>>16603349
admitting that Qdoba, a competitor, offers multiple variants of sour cream without distinguishing them

ground beef is labeled at the STORE with lean/fat percentage - but taco bell does not have to mention that

but somehow a 4% difference in milkfat is massive enough it needs to clog up a couple precious seconds in a short advertisement where full nutritional information is accessible at the click of a button for interested consumers

[Anonymous No.16603694]

>>16603633
Why are you willingly this stupid about the topic? You HAVE TO, by LAW, state SPECIFICS ABOUT PRODUCTS WHEN DERIVATIVES EXIST. It's required. REQUIRED. IT IS MANDATED. Even if a case of a fine doesn't exist, that doesn't negate that companies are REQUIRED TO LABEL THE PRODUCT AS SUCH. Why would they willingly be fined because there's a single autistic retard like you in the world?

[Anonymous No.16603698]

>>16603504
apparently not considering the FDA has all of those laws in place as well.

[Anonymous No.16603703]

>>16603694
We are talking about verbal advertisement - not a physical ingredient label for raw product - you don't have to give every detail of every ingredient, the purpose is just to give customers a sense of what is in the offered product, I don't see how labeling a variant of sour cream as simply sour cream is hurting anyone and the lack of ANY enforcement actions about this would seem to agree with me

>Why would they willingly be fined because there's a single autistic retard like you in the world?

what if you wouldn't be fined at all because shortening the name of reduced fat sour cream to sour cream in a time-sensitive ad is a reasonable marketing gesture and isn't done to mislead the customer and offers no substantial difference in finished product

[Anonymous No.16603714]

>>16603698
lets say taco bell sold milkshakes - nobody would think it weird - at all to say that "hurr milkshake is made with real creamy dairy milk" or some ad like that - regardless of whether they were made with whole or 2% milk - but somehow you need to be anal with reduced vs full fat sour cream or the imaginary stazi police considers THAT minor distinction important

have you ever heard a milkshake advertised with which fat content milk it is made with (apart from the one at like heart attack grill I guess!)?

[Anonymous No.16603830]

How is Qdoba not getting fined for offering low fat sour cream as just sour cream? Hmm?

[Anonymous No.16603909]

>>16603703
You're actually rampantly stupid, or engaging in whole-hearted trolling. I told you things are classified in specifics because they're required to.
https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?fr=131.160
You cannot label or promote your 'sour cream' as "sour cream" unless it's 18% milk-fat, otherwise you have to label it. Why are you the way you are?

[Anonymous No.16603911]

>>16603714
if you go to dairy queen and look at the package for the dilly bars in the freezers you will see that they say "frozen dairy dessert" and the word "ice cream" is not used anywhere, because it would be illegal if they did.

[Anonymous No.16603934]

>>16603909
Then how does Qdoba get away with, per one of its own employees, offering light sour cream as simply sour cream to customers?

>>16603911
>package
>verbal advertisement

[Anonymous No.16603968]

>>16603934
Qdoba's sour cream contain 50 calories per ounce (28g). Daisy sour cream is 60 calories per 30g. Daisy light sour cream is 35 calories per 30g. Taco Bell's "reduced fat sour cream" is 20 calories per serving, I couldn't find the size.

Do you recognize the trend here? Do you know what's happening? Qdoba's sour cream meets the 18% milk fat standard at the very least.

[Anonymous No.16603997]

>>16603968
They literally said they add water to the sour cream and still offer it to the customer as just sour cream at Qdoba. So it isn't even what the nutritional facts are stating.

[Anonymous No.16604024]

>>16603997
Then that's illegal and if the FDA or another governing body found out, they would be fined. But that isn't how it's presented at a corporate level because it likely isn't company policy to do so, maybe the manager at that Qdoba does it to save cost on sour cream. I've worked at fast food places before and other stores in the chain did practices that corporate forbade all the time.

[Anonymous No.16604052]

>>16604024
>fda has nothing better to do than fine you for calling reduced fat sour cream sour cream in an ad

its weird how much u shill for bootlickers and authoritarianism doe

[Anonymous No.16604080]

>>16604052
It's the entire agency's job to do so. I assume you aren't op, because he would be rebutting the comment about it being a single-store issue instead. I'm also not shilling for anything, I'm stating how things are done and why, and repercussions for not doing so.

If you think governing bodies are authoritarianism, neck yourself or eject yourself from society. Companies cannot be taken at their word for anything because they're a capitalistic venture by nature. This is why rule enforcements exist. If you want a society where government doesn't intervene, you can enjoy your watery soy paste with artificial flavoring that's 97% cheaper to produce than real sour cream, but it's labeled and sold as sour cream.

[Anonymous No.16605365]

>You cannot label or promote your 'sour cream' as "sour cream" unless it's 18% milk-fat, otherwise you have to label it. Why are you the way you are?

[Anonymous No.16606024]

>>16605365
I can't tell whose side you are on.

[Anonymous No.16606511]

>>16604080
truly, you being told in an ad that reduced fat sour cream is simply sour cream is the worst exploitation of capitalist ventures

[Anonymous No.16606596]

>>16606511
If that's what you were able to extrapolate or infer from the post, then you're more helpless than the wojack poster.

[Anonymous No.16607212]

>>16606596
helpless because I don't think referring to a variant of sour cream as simply sour cream in a very time-limited ad is deceptive when full nutrition information is easily available to anyone that autistic about their food

[Anonymous No.16607344]

>>16607212
>variant
No dumbfuck, in order to be called sour cream it must meet the legal standard. This what keeps me from jerking my dog off, thickening it with some flour, and calling it sour cream.

[Anonymous No.16607348]

>>16607344
reduced fat sour cream is substantially similar in taste and texture to regular sour cream

why does a short time limited ad need to mention this minor distinction or face authoritarian hassling?

im not suggesting they manipulate the nutrition information

[Anonymous No.16607358]

>>16607348
Read The Jungle

[Anonymous No.16607370]

>>16607358
books are old thoughts - I don't waste my short time here on earth with that

[Anonymous No.16607387]

>>16607370
>I am happy to an ignorant cunt

[Anonymous No.16607395]

>>16607387
well yeah, I don't think I gain anything from old thoughts, I'd rather think for myself

[Anonymous No.16607399]

>>16603180
OP, people read nutrition facts, and that's why it's reduced fat, just overall calorie counts, fat grams and things the stupid focus upon. This is why mayo is excluded from a sandwich that typically always has it, from the BLT to the Chick-Fil-A....when they leave it off, people do the eat this not that versuss your competitors that leave it off.

[Anonymous No.16607519]

>>16607399
so all I'm suggesting is that nutrition facts can specify the reduced fatness without needing to waste time in a 30 sec ad to sperg out over the fact that they are jewing you with the sour cream

[Anonymous No.16608760]

>>16607519
You are cognitively braindead or just a troll. They have to affix "reduced fat" if they mention their "reduced fat" sour cream at all, in any context, even for 'time limited ads'. It's a law. It's a regulation. It's mandated. Why are you so unwilling to accept this? They cannot just say "sour cream". They can't. THEY CAN NOT NOT SPECIFY IT'S "REDUCED FAT" IF THEY MENTION THEIR REDUCED FAT SOUR CREAM NO MATTER THE CONTEXT.

I'm done giving you (You)s. If you aren't trolling, seek counseling.

[Anonymous No.16609057]

>>16603633
>it ruins their advertising
good. fuck advertising and fuck advertising niggers.

[Anonymous No.16609438]

OP is obviously a troll. Food labeling laws exist and are so strict because food manufacturers used to heavily adulterate products with basically poison.
The Jungle does talk about this.
https://www.natlawreview.com/article/kraft-heinz-deceptive-labeling-settlement-approved
Kraft Heinz being sued because their packaging on coffee
>[they] “grossly” exaggerated the number of cups of coffee that could be made from the contents of the package.
https://nationalaglawcenter.org/aglaw-reporter/case-law-index/food-labeling/
here's a bunch of case laws on different food labeling lawsuits.

[Anonymous No.16610971]

>>16607344
That's a colorful example.

[Anonymous No.16611389]

>>16603180
>Taco Bell mention their sour cream is reduced-fat?
because americans were brainwashed in the 80s

[Anonymous No.16611428]

>>16607395
Which is clearly going very poorly considering you're a fucking moron

[Anonymous No.16612178]

The worst part is you want the fat in sour cream and an overall balance of nutrients with calories. This is counterintuitive and in the end, harmful.

[Anonymous No.16612208]

>>16609438
>saying a variant of sour cream is just sour cream is basically poisoning americans

no

[Anonymous No.16613499]

>>16603317
Explains once
>idungedit
Explain twice
>idungedit
Explain thrice
>i still dungedit
Sir, post IQ