Most fast food products for consumption are made
in minutes in a busy restaurant kitchen. In contrast, food that is used for
advertising is the result of hours of preparation and editing.
Several people including photographers, a food
stylist and an imaging specialist have a hand in creating advertising food
products from scratch in ideal conditions. The ingredients are layered the
moment they are needed, to ensure their optimum appearance.
Advertised food is handled less than food made for
consumption; it’s made fresh and never enclosed in packaging.
Each ingredient is added where it’s best shown in
the product, so that the consumer knows that it is present; which is paramount
with the rise of various allergies and diets in modern society.
But, why all the theatrics?
Advertising helps businesses attract consumers
that are new to their market. Thus, they hope to show their products at their
best and must display each ingredient in the product.The advertising brings them in and the quick,
convenient service keeps them coming even though most people find they aren’t
getting what the ad pictured.
However, adding appeal to products through
advertising is not only practiced in the quick service restaurants. Most food
businesses, including Lean Cuisine and Stouffer’s enhance their product through
advertising, as shown in the article (Frisk, 2015).
Modern society is much faster paced and consumers
spend less time, not only eating their food, but choosing it as well.
Businesses must grab the customers attention quickly - and keep it - to build their
customer base.
Frisk, A. (2015, June 12). Advertising vs real
life: Why the food we eat doesn't look like food in the pictures. Retrieved
September 14, 2015, from
Questions for discussion:
1. Do you think it is important to have
advertising regulations for food products?
2. Do you think food products should only be
advertised in the condition in which
they are sold?
3. How important is it that the food products
photographed have the same ingredients used in regular production? Should
substitutions be allowed in advertising?
After read this article, I think it is very important for related government sector to draw up advertising regulations to inhibit false advertising and over- exaggerated advertising situation. Because the huge difference between food products of advertising and real-life actualization will has a negative effect to our customers and market regulation.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, it is kind of cheating and dishonesty promotion method to attract customers to buy their products. Even the pictures or ingredients of food products are super ideal and healthy , customer will find the truth when they got the real stuff. Therefore, I don't think this is a better way to hook customers. On the contrary, company who use exaggerated advertising will lose expectancy and loyalty of your brand.
Another negative factor is bad marketing regulations, which is not healthy competition relationship among the companies. Indeed, I appeal that related government should draw up some legal documents to reduce this situation.
Thank you for Michelle's sharing.
BEINI WENG
Beini,
DeleteThose are some very good points. I agree that it is sort of a dishonesty. Advertising relys on food stylists and photographers to up-play the food they are selling. They strategically place everything to accentuate the good things about their product and it can be a bit of a disappointment to see a difference in what you are actually getting. There are some laws on how advertising can accentuate their product but advertisers are still able to do this.
It would be possible to tighten the laws but would it be necessary? From a marketing standpoint you want your product advertised at its best and sometimes in real life its not always at its best. The idea is to draw in the customers and it works! its hard to please both advertiser and consumer.
Yes, it does promote unhealthy competition. Some competitors have more resources available to them than others to create fancier and more expensive ads. with such a diverse pool of advertisers it can be hard to regulate.
Answering question 3: By Johlissa Brathwaite
ReplyDeleteI think that showing what the food is holds some importance. For some it is great to see exactly what they are getting just by looking at a picture. Advertising is meant to enhance products, so adding cheese, bread, onions etc to a burger makes it more appealing, however it is obvious that the customer wont receive that in a box of hamburgers. On the other hand if the product is meant to look exactly like what is being shown on the box, then I think it has more of an importance on being portrayed correctly. For example if a box of oreo cookies has sprinkles in the icing then there should be sprinkles in the product. For me, if it is meant to enhance the product then that is great.
Johlissa Brathwaite
Johlissa,
DeleteDefinitely! I think it is one thing to up-play the product and accentuate what is already there, but to add things that don't come with it can be deceiving. Maybe if it said on the box clearly that this was a suggested serving or partnered with a specific milk brand for example and said "Great to pair with this product!" it would be a better approach.
The pictures on the box of food products show the best looking when it's done. We usually see that all ingredients are not enclosed for cooking it. We also can see 'how to use' on the back of the package which says 'add other ingredients'. For instance, we need to add some milk which is not enclosed a soup mix. Cereal box has a picture of cereals in milk with even fruits. But it doesn't have milk and fruits inside. The picture says how we can use it and get a best looking with the product. And we can see it at a glance. It is one of roles of advertisement. In my opinion, as long as the false and exaggerated advertisements are regulated by guideline in food industry, it can be allowed to use substitution or additional ingredients in advertising.
ReplyDeleteAram Hong
Aram,
DeleteI like that you are looking at it from more of a marketing viewpoint rather than a consumer. From a consumer standpoint i can see how it can be frustrating and confusing. But for an advertiser it makes sense. as long as they are following guidelines set out they are technically doing nothing wrong. I think if they make it more clear that these items are suggested servings consumers might not feel so cheated when opening boxes of things.
In my opinion, to regulate the advertisement is necessary. Because the picture of the foods or pruducts always show good look, plentiful raw materials and tempting colors, but in fact the products are not like the pictures. I think The most of companies just care about how to attract customers eyes and how to increase sales; however, they really consider iti is a lie for customers. I think, on the one hand it is bad for the company's long term development. On the other hand, it is a fraudulent actions for people. So I think it is importance to correct the adverting.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, my name is Yao Li.
DeleteYao Li.
DeleteThank you for your comment. I agree that advertising honesty is extremely important. First, because consumers should get what they are paying for; which is what should be advertised. Also, as mentioned above, customers need to know what is in their food.
Advertising regulations actually prohibit the use of misleading or false representations. Those convicted are fined and can be sent to prison for fraud. This legislation ensures the integrity of advertisers and validity of the advertisement.
The negative impact it may have on a company is an interesting idea; and I believe you are completely correct. Any company found to be falsely advertising its product could likely see a drop in their market share, or even suffer a ban of their product.
Thank you for sharing
Your article described the real and prevalent phenomenon of the current food marketing. Nowadays, advertising images play an important role in the food marketing. However, usually these images can not show the views the true products. It delivers incorrect information to customers, which misleads them making wrong decisions.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you. Advertising images do play an important role in food marketing. Delivering incorrect information to the customer can cause them to be misled. If a product is advertised to look amazing but in reality looks terrible, tastes bland, and unappealing, the customer should have bought something else.
DeleteAlthough we call it false advertisement, it's become what we expect. Over time, the unrealistic perfection shown to us has made us expect higher quality and far more perfect representation of things that can't naturally or realistically be so perfect.
ReplyDeleteIf false advertisement has made us expect higher quality in our food and a better looking product, would that not cause people to be disappointed with what they get when the real thing shows up in our order? It might be true that we expect false advertising, but I don't think expectations change reality.
DeleteFood needs to be marketed looking it's best, even if it requires a food stylist because in reality if the food was put together in less than a minute in a fast food restaurant and then photographed who would really crave that squashed burger? Though I do agree with the food being styled for marketing purposes,the advertised image of the food needs to show the actual ingredients that will be in the complete meal. This rule goes for advertising of complete meals, but it does not really come into effect for the advertising of single ingredients. For example a frozen burger or a boxed cereal. Their packages usually depict the finished meal using the single ingredient inside the package and this is okay because on these packages it states exactly what the consumer is getting and often provides the recipe to recreate the meal on the package. But for complete meals you order in a restaurant it is not always easily accessible to find this information unless clearly illustrated.
ReplyDeleteI probably wouldn’t want a terrible squashed burger at a fast food restaurant either, but they’re not usually put together with such a lack of care that they’re that badly ruined. I think if somebody just took some care in making the burger out of the real ingredients it would still look quite nice. I agree that advertisements need to show the ingredients that you’ll receive if you purchase that food item. Advertising single ingredients with images of more than that ingredient can still be misleading but I agree that the consumer will understand exactly what they are getting if they read the package. The single ingredient will look more appealing than it should though.
DeleteI think that it is much important to show the same image of ingredients in advertised and regular food products. The most important reason that why food companies advertise is to maximize their profit or revenues. However, current consumers are smart to recognize and distinguish that images of advertisement are real or exaggerated. In addition, social media is well developed, so the information about the food products is spread aboard easily and fast if it is overstated. As a result, the food company will be able to get a negative impact to its reputation and its sales are down as well. For getting positive image from consumers, food companies try to improve their product qualities as much as their advertised images. Thus, I think food substitutions should be allowed in advertising for attracting consumers’ attentions and improving food qualities.
ReplyDeleteGoeun Lee
Thank you Goeun Lee for your reply,
DeleteI completely agree that advertising transparency is crucial in food marketing. Also, it is true that as media broadens the public's view of companies they need to be aware of the impact their marketing or advertising decisions can have on their reputation and profits.
In my opinion, I believe that it is important for food products to only be sold in the condition that they are advertised for a couple of reasons. Take a hungry man tv dinner for example, when you look at the way that the food is presented on the box, Hungry Man advertises the food to look like an APPETIZING home cooked meal that come in giant portions, in reality, after opening the package, you're disappointed to see frozen, lifeless, tiny portions. It is very disappointing for customers to invest money into something that is supposed to look appetizing and filling that isn't. Secondly, by delivering a product to customers that is less than what was anticipated or advertised by the company can lead to other problems such as false advertising, bad reputation, etc. Although it is important for companies to make their products look top notch as far as marketing and advertising purposes, I think that it is important that they follow through with making their actual selling products to look the same way for customers.
ReplyDeleteHello Kristine. Disappointment is definitely a problem for consumers who realize that what was advertised isn't what they are getting; and businesses need to realize that consumer enlightenment is on the rise and purchasers need more than a shiny ad. Thus, I agree that food products should be sold in the condition in which they are advertised. Thank you for your reply
DeleteI believe that it is important to have advertising regulations for food products because if there is none there would be a lot of angry customers. I understand companies tend to falsify the looks of products to attract more customers, but it is misleading and false advertisement. If there are advertising regulations for food products, there would be less angry and disappointed consumers and maybe it will attract more. The companies should show more realistic and not over exaggerated photos of their products, because that is what consumers would look for when purchasing or making the products they want.
ReplyDeleteThank you,
Cammi Huynh
Thank you for your comment. I agree stricter regulations on advertising are needed in the food industry. Misleading advertising leads to an unhappy market share that will flock to more honest competitors. Honesty in advertising is crucial for longevity in business. Would you return to a business that had disappointed you? I think not.
DeleteHow important is it that the food products photographed have the same ingredients used in regular production? Should substitutions be allowed in advertising?
ReplyDeleteI feel that it is very important, if not crucial that they use the same products used in advertisement for production as well. When a consumer sees a product, maybe for the first time, through advertisement they have a certain expectation, and when they purchase that product they should be getting what they have expected. I don’t feel that substitutions are acceptable because if they need to substitute for whatever reason, it should be made aware to the consumer before they purchase the product so they know what they’re paying for. When you set a premise, such as a picture for advertisement, food especially, it’s expected of you to at least follow through with the right ingredients, if they can’t always follow through with presentation.
Thanks Afiyah, that is a great point; first-time consumers are a major concern when false advertising occurs.Especially with food sensitivities and allergies that are becoming more common. In the industry now business need to be aware that their advertising is not only marketing, but informational as well.
DeleteWhile I don't believe food styling is inherently a bad thing, I do think that there should be some sort of advertising regulation involved so that ads are not misleading. Food styling should make the product look appealing and hopefully display all of the components of the meal, but it should also be realistic enough that it resembles the food that consumers will actually receive when they make a purchase. Either the advertisements should show something a little closer to what the restaurants or companies sell, or the companies have an obligation to put out food of a higher quality that matches what is being shown in ads.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of substituting ingredients in food advertising, I'm on the fence. For something like ice cream, I can see marketers wanting to photograph a substitution that looks like ice cream but doesn't melt under the various studio lights. In other instances, if what they are trying to sell doesn't look good in photographs, then maybe that is a problem with their product, and a substitution would be dishonest.
Thank you Eliza for your consideration of both the pros and cons. I agree that food - like any other consumer product - can be honestly styled to attract customers, but the businesses should be held to higher standards than they are now. I am against substitutions in advertising; however, as you discuss, allowances for environment and circumstances are sometimes required. Thank you for your comment.
Delete2. Do you think food products should only be advertised in the condition in which
ReplyDeletethey are sold?
I think that this marketing strategy is effective but i think that in some cases, food products may or may not have to be advertised in the condition in which they are sold. In McDonalds, I agree with them altering their food products in commercials or in the photos to make the product more appealing to customers. That way in can attract the consumers and make their product more appetizing. In other cases, I think that certain food products can be captured as the condition in which they are sold in. Having to work in a pizzeria, I have seen my owners approaches to advertise his food products. They captured most of his photos that are on the restaurant website with his iphone without having to edit the image or alter it. I have also taken pictures with my digital cameras and applied it to his online menu as well as his take out menus, I feel that in this scenerio, a lot on consumers prefer to see the rustic look of the homamade italian style look.
Advertising is a means of promoting a product, therefore I believe that businesses have a right to spruce up the products, making them look much better than how they are sold. It sucks at times, such as when you see a burger in an ad looking bright, full and juicy, but the actual purchased product is flat, unappealing and dull. But as you mentioned, the cooks are not going to spend hours on each individual burger which is just going to end up as mush in the consumers mouths anyway. The only way an ad will work is if it is appealing to the consumer, and companies are not going to advertise a flat lifeless burger. It feels like false advertisement, but its not. You can walk into a McDonalds and purchase the same burger from the advertisement. It will contain everything inside that was advertised, its just not going to look like a piece of art.
ReplyDeleteThat being said, ads are still deceiving in how they display their products. For example, I remember seeing an ad for a chicken sandwich at Tim Hortons. In the ad the sandwich contained the chicken as well as some bacon, but when I received the sandwich, there was no bacon (which was quite depressing). This is not because they wouldn't sell it with bacon as advertised, but that you would have to pay an extra dollar or so to add it on. So, substitutions should be allowed, so long as they give the consumers the option of buying it exactly the way it is advertised. Advertisements are deceiving, but that's how they sell products, otherwise they would'nt make as much money as they do.
I really agree with the point that people ignore the quality of foods in the fast-paced society and choose it only by different kinds of appealing advertisements. Chain food stores and fast food stores make their ads really attractive; however, the real one might have huge different than the one shows in the ads. Hence, in this case, people starts to complain about the food quality and probably shows distrust for these kind of marketing tools.
ReplyDeleteAdvertisement should be attractive, but needs to be honesty as well. Marketing tools aim to make a sale based on high quality products they have instead of cheating customers.
Shuai Dong
Do you think food products should only be advertised in the condition in which they are sold?
ReplyDeleteWhy all the theatrics? Advertisement is used to influence audiences to buy their products and like stated in the blog they hope to show their products at their “best”. But, does it make it false advertisement because the products used in the ads are not always the actual components used in the products they sell? The blog actually got me questioning because they are some very impressive advertisements that must have required a lot of hard work; all for the purpose of promoting a product. But, I am also aware of the sadness when you receive a product that looks nothing like advertised. So, in answering this questioning I believe that food products should be advertised in their “best” possible way. But, only using the actual components used for the actual product. There will probably be a difference in the way it looks because of the time put in putting together the product for the ad, but at least it shows the product at its “best”. It will actually be the product, but with just a little more effort put in the assembling.
Eunice Azurin Liban
I think food products should not only be advertised in the condition in which they are sold because it complements the product in which it can be used. For example, the product of burger patties is advertised as a burger with lettuce, tomato, etc. This shows the consumers how and what the product is used for which can inspire the customer as well as inform the customer. Products that are advertised with other stuff appeals the customers’ eye that can familiarize the customer; therefore I think food should not only be advertised in the condition in which they are sold in.
ReplyDeleteJacquelyn Hechanova