We have all seen fast food restaurant advertising where the burger or sandwich looks so piled high with so much meat and fixings, who could resist. The reality often is that what you are served is perhaps half the size of what was shown in the advertising.
Now a New York consumer says enough of this deception as he files a suit against Taco Bell for allegedly showing some of the specialties to be doubled their actual size.
*MOUSE PRINT:
Here, the Crunchwrap Supreme looks nothing like the advertisement in terms of the amount of meat or salad in it.
And below is how Taco Bell’s Mexican Pizza is advertised versus what the consumer got served. [Spelling errors from the lawsuit.]
The complaint goes on to allege:
Taco Bell materially overstates the amount of beef and/or ingredients contained in its advertisements for the Overstated Menu Items by at least double the amount. Taco Bell’s advertisements for the Overstated Menu Items are unfair and financially damaging to consumers as they are receiving a product that is materially lower in value than what is being promised. If Plaintiff knew that the Mexican Pizza contained half of the amount of beef and bean filling as advertised, he would not have purchased the Mexican Pizza and/or he would not have paid the $5.49 price that he paid for the Mexican Pizza.
The company is being sued for unfair, deceptive, and misleading practices. The consumer is seeking a stop to the misrepresentations and wants monetary damages for all similarly situated diners. Taco Bell has not responded to media requests for comments.
We hope other companies that advertise gargantuan sandwiches but serve you ones with much less meat will also find themselves in front of a judge.
IS there an actual weight component in the comparisons? Although they look different ( one squashed, the other nicely rounded)… there is no actual data stating that there is less of each/any component in the one advertised…. I do not patronize Taco Bell… and I do not value frivolous law suits.
Taco Bell isn’t the only company screwing the consumers . Subway does a good job of showing larger than life sandwich servings on commercials as well. Another company that goes overboard with showing their product is Oscar Mayer. They show sandwiches with mile high meat piled on them and when you read the back of the meat packages it says a serving size is 1 or 2 slices… That makes a big difference.
I was just going to mention Subway myself. They are really the worst offender when it comes to this practice. I am surprised that they get targeted for a frivolous lawsuits about their tuna fish but you never hear anything about lawsuits for misrepresenting the size of their sandwiches.
Yes, but Oscar Mayer is not selling you ready made sandwiches. They are selling you the ingredients for a sandwich. How much of the product you choose to use is up to you. Just because they say on the package a single serving is 1 or 2 slices doesn’t mean you are bound to make your sandwich accordingly. If you want a big overstuffed sandwich that is your choice.
I saw a commercial for Subway yesterday where the young lady held up a turkey sub the size of a loaf of bread with half a turkey in it! I couldn’t imagine how it represented anything other than trickery meant to deceive gullible people about the amount of meat in their sandwiches.
Also how common is the difference? TFA doesn’t say if they checked one location, one time. That crunch wrap is so different, it was probably a mistake, or one franchisee’s policy.
BTW, most advertisements of food aren’t normally pictures of food, but things painted and created to look like the best version of food. 🙂
I’m back and forth on this one. All fast food is over played in advertising, but I would also say that I regularly get Crunchwraps that never look like the ones in the picture on the right. They’re normally fairly full and satisfying as far as fast food goes.
I knew a food photographer and the photos he took ALWAYS made the product look much better than what you actually bought. They used all kinds of extra coloring, props, stuffings, makeup, etc. to make item look more mouth-watering than it actually is. After the shoot, they wouldn’t eat it but toss it in the trash.
Gerry, your reply re food photography reminds me of a field trip our high school photography club took to a major advertising agency in New York City. We got to watch a Campbell’s still-photography session for one of their soups; I think it was chicken noodle. They actually placed marbles into the bowl, below the soup’s ingredients, to make the ingredients look more plentiful, without actually increasing the amount of ingredients. Pretty unethical even back then, wouldn’t you say? And I went to high school when you could order dinosaur soup…
Dan, may we assume it was fresh meat?
I found this video interesting:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5pG0E2wQSI
Bob, thanks for posting that URL. Really fascinating, insightful video on food photography and the ads that come from it.
I know a food photographer too. Half of the stuff they use to make the food look more appealing isn’t even edible. But even that isn’t as bad as showing a sandwich stuffed with 4 times the meat and cheese you actually get when you order it in the store.
McDonald’s is another big offender. Look at the picture of their McChicken on the app menu. What you get when you order is a far cry from the picture. The last time I got one, I took pictures and was going to complain but figured why bother. They really don’t care. But five shreds of lettuce is not equal to the lettuce leaves on the pictured sandwich. Maybe we should start doing “What I Ordered, What I Received” posts on FB and tag the restaurant.
I’m continually amazed that people actually still eat at a TB. Although I don’t know why?
I haven’t been in a TB for years. The last time I did stop I was about to order when I looked back to the food prep area. The floor was wet and grimey looking. There were food scraps on the floor and employees were walking on them. The place was just filthy. I left without ordering and wrote a sharp letter to the company when I got home.
As far as pictures of food in ads…all companies enhance the appearance of their products. Most of the time what you’re looking at isn’t even food. If you want a treat, go to YouTube and search for “Fake food in Ads”. Very entertaining.
The photos are to show what’s in the item, attract you as a customer, and yes, possibly to misrepresent the size of the item.
I call this a classic “bait and switch” scenario. We like to believe what we see in print ads, on TV or our devices. When we get the item, almost always it’s not what’s shown in the picture.
I suggest all of us return the item, ask for a refund and force these companies to do a better job representing the item they’re selling. Aren’t you tired of getting cheated? I know I am.
I agree. If enough people returned the subpar item for a refund, the company would most definitely sit up and take notice. I predict they would make minimal improvements and raise the price. Image is everything to a company and they don’t want to upset the shareholders.
I’m glad this consumer is doing something about it. Can you imagine the power we, as the consumer, has to make real change if we all banded together. We the people have the power, not the ruling class. Someday we will realize.
i have been to different McDonalds and if you can see into kitchen the burgers are precooked. they open a drawer, put burger on a bun, throw cold slice of cheese and condiments and wrap it up..
cold slice of cheese does not make a cheeseburger appetizing , it ruins the burger.
when they changed how they cooked things and called it fresh it ruined everything.