BS: Advertising abuses

Subject: BS: Advertising abuses
From: SINSULL
Date: 01 Nov 03 - 09:56 PM

Toys R Us just agreed to take its ad featuring their giraffe inhaling helium off the air. Then I see a KFC ad claiming that you can lose weight eating FRIED CHICKEN! One idiot sees another idiot and exclaims "You've lost weight (or something similar)!" Said idiot replies "I eat fried chicken." He is sitting their with a big bucket of greasy KFC. Then they show the protein and carb counts. The implication is that like Jarrod of Subway fame, you too can lose weight only in a semi- Atkins way with fried chicken. How do they get away with this crap?

Subject: RE: BS: Advertising abuses
From: LadyJean
Date: 01 Nov 03 - 11:08 PM

Because they used carb counts, not fat grahams. I've only seen the ad once, but there's probably some small print, somewhere that says, essentially, This won't work for most people.

Subject: RE: BS: Advertising abuses
From: NicoleC
Date: 01 Nov 03 - 11:57 PM

KFC is merely pointing out that to people on a low-carb diet, their product fits their diet. Compared to the insanely unhealthy stuff that touts itself as "healthy" because it's lower in fat than you might expect, or the chemical crap like Slim-Fast that calls itself "a balanced meal," I thought the ad was fairly straightforward and far less misleading than, say, ads for healthier fast food french fries.

Subject: RE: BS: Advertising abuses
From: Bill D
Date: 02 Nov 03 - 12:06 AM

besides-- the rules are, unless you are directly and explicitly lying thru your teeth, it's all ok to 'suggest' half-truths about products.

"We never MADE that claim...and we promise not to do it again!"

Subject: RE: BS: Advertising abuses
From: mack/misophist
Date: 02 Nov 03 - 12:57 AM

In American law there's a concept known as 'legitimate puffery' (lovely term) that more or less allows advertisers to say whatever they like as long as they don't lie outright. A few things are forbidden, such as "Doctors recommend...", but not many.

Subject: RE: BS: Advertising abuses
From: mack/misophist
Date: 02 Nov 03 - 01:18 AM

There's something wrong with that KFC ad. All the Kentucky Fried Chicken I've ever seen was heavily breaded. How can you do that without including a lot of carbohydrates? I smell a rat. Not the infamous Kentucky Fried Rat, either.

Subject: RE: BS: Advertising abuses
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 02 Nov 03 - 02:45 AM

Sure, there's a lot of breading. But there's so much grease that the carbohydrates are a small fraction of the total caloric source. You don't understand fractions and percents?

John

Subject: RE: BS: Advertising abuses
From: mack/misophist
Date: 02 Nov 03 - 10:53 AM

The per centage of fats must be quite variable. Since the type and amount of breading is certainly defined in the franchise rules, it's much more predictable. Don't forget that a lot of people will blot off what grease they can, and that bones, gristle, and other unappetizing parts will be thrown away, increasing the de facto percentage of the breading. In other words, I doubt the diet would allow it.

Subject: RE: BS: Advertising abuses
From: NicoleC
Date: 02 Nov 03 - 11:40 AM

KFC is pressure cooked. It really isn't very greasy compared, because it doesn't sit in the grease for more than a couple of minutes.

In fact, the KFC Nutrition Guide quotes an Original Recipe chicken breast (skin removed) at 3g of fat. Leave the skin and breading on, it's 19g of fat, 11g of carbs and 40g of protein. Taking the skin off removes the breading, too, reducing the carbs in that situation to 0g and fat to 3g and 29g of protein.

In short, if you take the skin off, you'd be hard-pressed to find a lower fat or lower carb fast food meat product anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: Advertising abuses
From: SINSULL
Date: 02 Nov 03 - 02:06 PM

But the weight loser in the ad is scarfing down chicken by the bucketful breading and all. He is not sharing his feast with anyone else.

And in the latest Subway ads, Subway dieters are being told that they can eat a pint of ice cream as long as they have Subway sandwiches for lunch.

Of course, anyone who believes these claims has to be a bit naive or at least short-sighted.

Subject: RE: BS: Advertising abuses
From: mack/misophist
Date: 02 Nov 03 - 08:47 PM

It is against the law to lie outright.

Subject: RE: BS: Advertising abuses
From: Amos
Date: 02 Nov 03 - 09:33 PM

But it is never against the law to (nicely) induce a dumkopf to lie to himself -- it is part of the great American tradition. Not to mention the Bush school of American political techniques.

The moral of that story is, learn not to lie to yourself no matter what the provocation!


A

Subject: RE: BS: Advertising abuses
From: Peace
Date: 03 Nov 03 - 12:01 AM

I find it had to believe advertisers would lie. If they do, why don't they have really loooooooooooooooooooooooooong noses, huh?

Subject: RE: BS: Advertising abuses
From: RangerSteve
Date: 03 Nov 03 - 06:23 AM

The KFC ad I saw last night pointed out that a serving of their chicken has less fat than a Burger King Whopper. They didn't say that it's healthy, just healthier than a Whopper. They're hoping that you don't read between the lines.

Subject: RE: BS: Advertising abuses
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Nov 03 - 08:32 AM

What happened to common sense..why are we so concerned with the patently stupid. Do we really need a law to let us know that KFC is fattening.
I know that advertises of junk food bend the truth a bit but no one os worse than the "medical community" at lying in ads...they do it with stats. When they are fund raising they always tell you hown many people a year die of the particular disease they are bumming for. Each claims it is the leading cause of death each year in Canada and quotes the grim statistics. Last year I added them up just out of curiosity... it turns out that 4 million people died of just four diseases. Talk about misleading advertising.

Subject: RE: BS: Advertising abuses
From: Blackcatter
Date: 03 Nov 03 - 09:13 AM

Fast food and cigarettes is how the politicians keep us from having Universal Health Care. All the stupid people who inadvertantly try to kill themselves by ingesting that crap on a regular basis exponentially increase the cost of healthcare in the U.S. The politicians can then point to just how rediculously expensive it would be to provide health care to all. If this weren't so, how come the fast food and Cigarette corporations are some of the highest contributors to campaign "war chests?"