Will new nutrition labels lead to healthier consumers?

The FDA is set to impose major changes to nutrition labels on food packages for the first time in over 20 years. The organization sites the need to bring labels up to speed with the contemporary American diet as a catalyst for the change. New labels are meant to be easier to understand and will be based on expanded portion sizes. Added sugars are in the center of the change with new labels making the distinction between natural and manufactured sugar additives. Many in the FDA and other nutritionists explain that the expensive change is necessary in the fight against obesity in the US. Even First Lady Michelle Obama praised the initiative and promoted the changes at the anniversary celebration for her “Let’s Move” campaign aimed at reducing obesity.

Consumers have a right to know what they are putting into their body. However, some new label requirements could force food and beverage companies to put nutritional information both good and bad on the front of their packaging. Could this potentially impact the branding and packaging of these products? What about products high in added sugar? Does this change damage their brand? What impact will these changes have on the way consumers view food and beverage products? 

CVS snuffs tobacco companies

Earlier this month, CVS announced they will no longer carry tobacco products in their stores. This decision comes at a great cost for the company. Accounting for 3% of the company’s total profit, CVS brings in $2 billion annually from the sale of tobacco products. According to CVS CEO Larry J. Merlo, eliminating tobacco from their stores is in line with the company’s purpose of helping customers on their path to better health. But is this move to better brand image worth the cost? Sure CVS is a pioneer and is demonstrating that the company is on a righteous mission to promote the fact that they care about their customers’ health but they are doing this at the expense of 3% of their annual revenue. Do you think this move will help to strengthen the brand and ultimately increase sales enough to cover the lost revenue?  Do you think this strategy is sustainable? What other benefits or costs do you see could come out of this move? Do you think other companies will follow suit? What does this mean for tobacco sales? Is it ethical to cut out a certain product completely or could this be seen as discrimination?

Part of a nutritious breakfast?

A few years ago I posted about Nutella’s deceptive ads claiming the spread was a healthy addition to a nutritious breakfast. After a class action settlement, Ferrero, the makers of Nutella, agreed to change their messaging in advertisements, on the label and on their website. However, it seems that Nutella is still trying to promote a healthy image for the brand. A food blogger has examined what is in Nutella and has discovered that the spread is far from healthy....but Nutella's website and other brand messaging still implies that it is healthy. Did Nutella change their advertising message enough? Should there be a warning on the label saying that it contains a high amount of sugar? How do you feel about marketing foods that are known to be unhealthy? Do you think there should be more or less regulation?

No smoking.....anywhere!

Many cities and states have smoking rules for public places. Bars, parks and restaurants are among the most commonly regulated establishments. However, according to a recent article, the city of San Rafael has rolled out a more aggressive ban on smoking. In an effort to cut down on second hand smoke, city officials have enacted the nation's strictest smoking ban prohibiting residents from smoking cigarettes in their own homes.

The ordinance applies only to multiple family housing units – ones that share a wall including apartments, duplexes and condos. While many would find this to be beneficial to the community, others may feel as though their freedom has taken a shot. Some argue that the ban is too harsh, forcing people to quit cold turkey or leave their home. Is a smoking ban in private residences justified? Does this ban on smoking infringe on the freedom of residents in San Rafael? Comment with your thoughts on the issue.

Are retailers the new Big Brother?

These days we rely heavily on our smartphone to get around. It is so easy to ask Siri where the nearest In-N-Out is and how to get there….but is this convenience at the cost of our privacy?

Google has started to expand its maps to include the inside of museums, airports and large stores in a number of countries. According to a recent article, stores have started to experiment with harnessing indoor positioning technology in order to track a customer’s movements within the store. The article says that some systems use video cameras, sound waves and magnetic fields. However, the most widely used technique is to intercept Wi-Fi signals emitted by shoppers’ smartphones, allowing their position within the store to be calculated. Stores also collect a unique identifier that allows them to build up behavioral information on return visitors. Ultimately, this technology will enable stores to push behavioral ads to shoppers’ smartphones.

Of course our movements as consumers are tracked online but indoor positioning is a new frontier of targeted advertising.  Is this an invasion of consumer privacy? Should stores be allowed to track and record movements of customers? How about using this data to push targeted ads? Could this new technology have an effect on the sales and marketing of brick and mortar stores? Comment with your opinion.

Online Reviews - True or False?

In today’s digital world, it is common for companies to be represented online. Social media and the like open the forum to consumers to start a conversation about businesses and products. Most of the time these discussion forums act as a consumer’s first impression on a company they may not be familiar with….but how much of this information is true?

A recent article discusses the increasing trend of companies writing or buying fake reviews to improve their online presence. Many popular sites such as Yelp have started policing such activities with algorithms aimed at targeting and removing fake reviews. As marketers we know how much misrepresentation can damage a product’s reputation…so why do it? Why is it attractive to companies to publish fake reviews? What are the risks companies take when publishing fake reviews? What are the potential impacts on the customer? Should the FTC ramp up regulation on online forums? Comment with your opinion.

Up in Smoke

New York’s city council voted this week to raise the legal age to buy tobacco products to 21. The reason for the change - NY Health Commissioner Thomas Farley says 80 percent of the city’s adult smokers start before age 21. Additionally, New York has set the minimum price of a pack of cigarettes at $10.50 and upped the fines for illegal and untaxed sales.  Mayor Michael Bloomberg argues that these measures will effectively decrease the use of cigarettes among 18-20 year olds.

We all know smoking causes cancer yet cigarettes are still a part of pop culture and are marketed to young people. Tobacco companies, although heavily regulated, look to appeal to a young, hip generation. Will these changes help to deter young people from smoking? What implications could this potentially cause for tobacco business? Do you think these new restrictions are fair for tobacco businesses? Will this new policy have an effect on tobacco advertising’s target market? Comment with your view on this ethical issue.