linked in facebook twitter rss

  • Interbrand
  • Brandchannel

your chance!
your chance!
  Where lies the future for food brands?
 
 Although cheap junk food is a lot more tempting, people are now getting smarter. Its no longer so easy to fool people into eating junk food. So my strategy as a corporate cheap burger maker would be to start healthifying my products asap. Expensive healthy food is where the REAL margins are! 
Anonymous - February 28, 2004
 
 I guess food is good. I think so. 
Bob, Owner, TV - February 28, 2004
 
 Well fast food or junk food as many of us would like to call it will always be popular. Try as hard as we want to, its popularity just cannot be diminished. However the times are changing and with it the concern for healthy living or health food is also on an increase. Today not only we are concerned as to what we are eating but what goes into it is also a concern. However for a generation that has successfully thrived and grown on it, leaving its old habbit of depending on fast food or junk food cannot end. Thus the future of the food business lies in adapting itself quickly to the changing needs to the consumer,who still wants to grab a fast food but is now also concerned about what goes into it and not whether it fills one's appetite only. It's really interesting how these fast food chains are adapt themselves in the future.... 
Avik Roy Choudhury, Account Management, Capital Advertising, New Delhi - March 1, 2004
 
 Surely some of the larger fast food chains could begin selling 'low-fat' options? If Weigh-Watchers can release a low fat burger, why can't these fast food giants figure it out? Think of the potential profits for the low-fat Big Mac... 
Anonymous, Designer, - - - - March 1, 2004
 
 If you can develop food that is cheap, fast, and flavorful - all while being healthy and even good for you - you've got a killer brand. 
Anonymous - March 1, 2004
 
 If our European counterparts can eat so much more healthy, with lass fat children and adults why don't we get off the American band-wagon of obese people and start looking to mainland Europe (not the UK). Fresh produce is the only way to go. 
Anonymous - March 1, 2004
 
 Would I be willing to pay an extra $5 to $10 a meal if I knew that eating something healthier, but more expensive, would help prolong the healthy years of my life? Definitely. And that is why I often buy organic foods, skip the aisle at the store with the Oreos and gave up 'freedom fries' altogether. Do I know that processed sugars and grains, and foods grown with heavy pesticides are bad for me? Sure. But, I admit it's hard to give up drive-thru cheeseburgers at a time in my life when I'm trying to save both money and time, and looking for a little extra fulfillment.

Yet, I, like many consumers today, feel slighted when food manufacturers try to hide the fact that certain foods are dangerous if consumed rather frequently. Eat a cheeseburger and you will be happy. Drink a cola and you will be happy. Eat that larger portion of food, after all, you deserve to indulge a little. These messages are everywhere and not surprisingly they have made many companies very rich. But wait! At the same time a suprisingly increasing number of consumers are getting sick, gaining weight and just aren't so happy anymore.

I believe that the food manufacturers and restaurant chains are obligated to provide healtier food options, and to spend a large dollar amount advertising them. If cigarette companies can be held liable for diseases related to smoking, then it's only a matter of time before people start connecting the dots between unhealthy diets and future disease. Like smoking and bad habits, food consumption is a habit that began in the first years of our lives. Food manufacturers are aware of what vital role diet plays in our health, yet they are more so aware of what many roles food plays in fulfilling emotional urges and providing false satisfaction. That's really what my rocky road ice cream fetish is all about, right? And after that, it all comes down to what's available, what's affordable and what gets our attention. And what gets our attention is most often the foods that are popular. The foods that have the image of cool.

Does it matter if what we eat is healthy? How many consumers are willing to take a good look at that list of ingredients and nutritional information and then make their purchasing decisions? How many have questions about what is really in their food and are demanding answers? Probably more than you would think. Unfortunately, as a society we are taught to 'eat in the moment' and worry about the effects on our health down the road. But, people can't afford to ignore what's listed in the ingredients any longer. A lot of people realize we can't afford to simply do what is easy, what is popular. Eating habits are changing, even as Krispy Kreme's stock is going up. Fast food and junk food are indeed very popular. But what is popular is not always right. And its amazing what a little bit of knowledge can do to change things.

If you are ready for this, and are truly committed to helping consumers lead better and healthier lives you will prosper in the future. 

Kimberly, Research Analyst - March 1, 2004
 
 Bad food will always exist, as will those who consume it. Organic foods should be the standard rather than fat-ridden foods. 
Anonymous - March 1, 2004
 
 Cheap food with filling ingredients does appeal...to my meagre bank balance. What upsets me most is that quality of food and health matters have become a class issue of sorts. For a long time, and even to an extent now, the true nature of what we are eating has been somewhat shielded from public knowledge. So it's been the educated who are aware of the dangers of modified foods and high-fatty diets etc. and often those with lower income and less education miss out. And added to the vicious cycle is the fact that “bad for you” foods are cheaper options.

Organic and nutrient rich fresh foods are considerably more expensive thus making them a privilege to those who can financially afford it. But sadly, as far as health is concerned, none of us can afford to forego the nutrition that comes from these foods. It needs to be a more widely discussed/taught topic among all backgrounds and more accessible to people of all income levels.

One school system in the UK has taken to providing a free piece of fruit to children everyday. In turn the kids are thinking about healthy choices and tend to seek out more fruit at other times. Critics say the cost of such a programme isn’t warranted as the nutritional benefit of one piece of fruit is negligible in the long run. But perhaps its the change in perception and attitude that are most valuable? Will a government tax on fatty foods help? Perhaps we need more government support for the small organic farmers? 

Willson, Consultant, beBRAND.net - March 1, 2004
 
 Sadly, if the public wants fatty food and it sells, large food brands will continue to exploit that market.

Although i think brands should change their ingredients for humanitarian reasons, it doesn't look like they will be forced to from consumer behavior. 

Anonymous - March 1, 2004
 
 Dr Phil once said (ans its something of an anthem for the self-help generation) "There are no victims; only volunteers." I live in a society that rests heavily on fast food, yet I manage to eat helthily, and it costs me no extra money. Just because the Macdonalds is sitting there with a welcoming brand and inviting lighting, there is no reason why we can't go instead to a supermarket and buy a bread roll and some sliced cheese. People have to take control of their eating and when they stop blaming fast food, the latter will have to shift its focus. While fast food has a captive audience- one that blames while proclaiming an imprisoned status- fast food will not change. 
anonymous - March 1, 2004
 
 As many of you are saying, the secret is to make fast food more healthy and to give consumers alternatives. McDonald's in Australia is doing this. They have introduced a Salads Plus menu and now have cereal, yoghurt and tinned fruit on their breakfast menu. The tagline of the campaign is 'a change for the better'. Are McDonald's in other countries also doing this? 
anonymous - March 1, 2004
 
 Which one is an increasing in value? Buying cheap meat or buying normal price but quality meat? 
Fevzi Gökaliler, Brand Specialist, P?nar Meat Turkey - March 2, 2004
 
 I think that a further problem that is often forgotten about is the dangers of all of the fad diets that have going around since the inception of the term 'diet'. People naively believe that crash diets will work and live on a diet of soup, no carbohydrates or whatever the crazy idea of the moment is, go back to their old habits and end up with a bigger problem than they started with.

Junk food is OK, however, moderation needs to be communicated, not an all or nothing approach. 

Anonymous - March 2, 2004
 
 It's really short term thinking and profiteering on the part of multi-nationals, is it really worth it for them?

It's an education and awarness issue coupled with availability. Fresh food is always best & tastes better.

I think this fast-food fad is a passing one. Once people realize that you pay for it in later years, they'll stay away from it.

I grew up being exposed to these processed stuff. At 40, I realized many things, and now am teaching my children to avoid these food. In the end I believe education and awareness is the key, surely no country wants to have sick people all around and be spending more on healthcare later on. Fancy McD footing some of your medical bills. 

Anonymous - March 2, 2004
 
 Governments have to realize that these foods will cause more people to need healthcare later in life. Therefore it's in their best interest to educate the public and even levy higher taxes on these outlets.

Besides, fast-food outlets are by far more polluting and generate unnecessary waste with their cost mentality. Eventually it's the government with the healthcare and clean-up to deal with. 

Ashvin Jetpuria - March 2, 2004
 
 Both viewpoints are equally retarded. This doesn't come close to sorting out the issue. Less pith, please and more insight. 
Ben Auld, Strategy Consultant - March 2, 2004
 
 Of course, the ethical discussion about the responsibility of food manufacturers to their consumers is an interesting one. And, as other contributors to the debate have pointed out, it may one day even become a legal one. That day, however, isn’t in our immediate future and therefore legal or ethical argumentation is rather like beating a dead horse...

In the long-term perspective I believe that many fast-food producers will see the light at the end of the tunnel. Many are currently, or soon will be, satisfying different target audiences at the same time with product stratification. BigMacs and McVeggies.

The question for branding specialists should be if it’s possible to change the image of a company that has weaned a generation on junk food into something that it’s never pretended to be -– healthy and ecological. A BigMac isn’t, and never will be, a granola bar. A strategy for addressing food concerns is useless if the brand that produces it can’t support or attain the desired image. And in that case, the strategy would have to be one of spin-offs and new branding. Something that’s not exactly easy on the bottom line of quarterly-driven, listed companies...

That said, and ending on a dead-horse ethical note, I for one think that the world could be a much better place if many people in certain geographic regions rethought their food-consumption patterns. On their own. 

Kurt B. Geiger, Copywriter, www.kurtgeiger.nu - March 2, 2004
 
 This whole discussion should return to its roots: educating children on food. Creating awareness and responsibility towards the impact of 'bad' food on your own body is key in this issue. Only then can you reverse the trend of whole generations becoming obese and dying because of bad eating habits.

After all, we're not forced to eat junk food. 

Jack, Account Planner, Darwin Consulting - March 3, 2004
 
 I think that food manufacturers should proactively start changing their product and marketing techniques to better serve their customers.

If food brands continue at this rate, it's going to take a lot to reverse the trend of them looking like 'bad' brand citizens.

Look at a brand like Kraft, which is coming under fire in the US for having all sorts of nasty ingredients in its food. It is easy to gain a reputation about being cynical toward the customer but more difficult to make a convincing image as a brand that cares. An organic brand like Stonyfield (dairy) has many loyal customers who do not speak badly of the brand. I think these customers are more valuable in the long term. 

Food for Thought - March 3, 2004
 
 It's not just what we eat that makes a difference to our lives and therefore fast food giants cannot realistically be held responsible for obesity and health related issues.

Sadly, global corporations are always going to exploit the consumer, it's up to us all to learn the facts about how junk food affects our bodies in the long term and then do something about it. 

Anonymous - March 3, 2004
 
 I used to be a fan of the fast food concept since my childhood, but not any more. More than 10 years back, the sense of health food intake started to develop where I was fat and I wanted to reduce my weight by adopting a diet.

Three years back, I noticed people started to get exposed to health care preachers supported by scientific reports, which highlights on the hazards the people would face if they keep on feeding on processed food stuff, artificial colors and flavors, preservatives, sugar, cola drinks, etc. Different school of thoughts on the other have emerged lately to guide people what to eat and what not through different media vehicles such as TV, radio and print.

For an example, Macrobiotic diet has risen strongly to convene people that the human body is geared to overcome any disease, provided that it takes the right nutritions. They usually talk with lots of confidence and challenging language such 'do not believe us, just come see on your own' or 'Any body who suffers from cancers, aids or whatever can contact us'. They interview people who were previosly sick with cancer and show how they were healed. That's not all, they are also returning the rise of the crime rate and the provocative behaviors to mainly the source of food (i.e eating/ drinking the right food would cause the crime rate to go down). They even talked about that a large treasury could be saved from the investments spent on countering the internal security problems.

Another angle that they have attacked apart form the above, the firtility of women and how can they gift the society an intact child. I must admit that till now they have not fully succeeded in influencing so many people yet. But noticeably, the number is increasing.

In my opinion, the fast food companies need to revise their strategies and probably seek some consultency from nutrition experts to develop products that could suit the market dynamic in the future. 

Yaarub O. Hashim, Account director, Promoaction DDB/ *advertising - March 3, 2004
 
 The phrasing of the two 'points' does fit well in under the clichè stereotype of the 'cynical marketing guy'. Where the question is whether the advantages that a lot of people are buying your burgers outweighs the disadvantage that the product damages the consumer's health and could kill it(heh).

If you think I'm hinting at an ethical stance here, you're completely correct. Branding and advertising in general is, after all, partly about convincing people to take a decision that they wouldn't necessarily take if they thought through it rationally. 

Anonymous - March 5, 2004
 
 Probably most people who voted 'Leave It', couldn't leave that yet. So, the 'green' food companies capable to help people change, will go far... there are many ways to do that. 
Ricardo Bronfen, Director, Vancox - March 5, 2004
 
 When will consumers become adults? Maybe when they are treated as adults. Food or drink bans are not the way to deal with the issue you raise. Teaching consumers is better, and this is the role of parents, schools, media, not the one of the food & drink industry. 
Edith Barthelemy, brand consultant, Free Lancer - March 8, 2004
 
 Taking the kids to McDonalds and having their birthday parties at Chucky Cheese still exist as hallmarks and iconic symbols within American culture. Are you suggesting telling the kids, "Let's go to Chipolte" and have birthday parties in the Whole Foods Deli?

And let's be honest, healthy foods (such as organic) are much more expensive. Value meals would be $8 to $9. And we question why there is little incentive for the big fast food giants to produce healthier foods. 

anonymous - March 8, 2004
 
 I don't think things are either black or white. It's not a question of whether I should stop eating at fast food chains altogether, but it's all about balance. I try to eat healthy foods as often as possible but still treat myself to McDonald's once in a while. I limit FF eating to max once a week and when doing so I stay away from the super sized menus and the extra cheeses & dips. For quick lunches I prefer a plain turkey, lettuce, tomatoe sandwich from a local deli rather than a cheesy sauce filled Enchilada. I say 'stay away from products with ingredients that resemble a chemistry course', stick to simple ingredients and lighter meals. 
Alexia - March 8, 2004
 
 As consumers, we have the perception that fast food is fun and tasty, whereas healthy food is probably boring and has bad or no taste at all. The big challenge for fast food companies is to convert healthy food in something attractive not just for the health issue but for all the motivations we have when we decide to eat outside our homes. 
Agustin Beccar Varela, Marketing Manager, Pernod Ricard Argentina - March 8, 2004
 
 Whenever you're hungry and you look for somewhere to 'fill up' what's the first place you come across? A fast food joint. They've got the best locations. What would happen if these prime sites only sold healthy food? I suspect it is all to do with immediate need as opposed to health considerations. Check out Spizzico in Italy, very popular and quite healthy. 
Phillip Adcock, Managing Director, Shopping Behaviour Xplained Ltd - March 8, 2004
 
 Fast food is taking a turn for the better through the growth of healthier chain alternatives such as Subway and Quiznos. For a real revolution to occur, however, significant pushes in NPD and distribution are needed to bring healthier takes on fast food up to taste with their destructive McBrothers and KFCisters. 
Anonymous - March 8, 2004
 
 Should every food brand shift toward healthy foods, or not? I think you’re missing the point. Brands are not built upon best practices; they are built on differentiation and consistent, predictable behavior. If McDonald's truly made the shift toward healthy foods (which would change their entire product line, including the salad dressings), they would alienate their existing customers and still not be attractive to health-conscious consumers.

Brands don’t become great by jumping on bandwagons. They are great because they remain authentic. Let’s bear in mind that the only food brands in Business Week's top-ten are Coke and McDonalds; and even hot new brands like Starbucks, Ben & Jerry’s and Quizno’s are far from what experts would call healthy.

Will some brands find loyal consumers willing to pay for healthy foods? Of course. But other brands will continue to be patronized by loyal consumers who don’t place a premium on fitness. Remember, Marlboro is also on the list of top-ten brands.

Brands are about 'different strokes for different folks', not following the pack. For every safety-conscious consumer carefully strapped into a Volvo, there’s somebody risking his neck on a Harley. Both are great brands. 

Kelly O'Keefe, CEO, Emergence, Inc. - March 8, 2004
 
 It obviously is important as the UK fast food companies are already producing a number of healthy alternatives. Personally I do not think this will work because if I wanted a salad I would not want it from McDonald's.

People need to take responsibility for their actions regarding food. Marketing only takes a proportion of the blame for making the brands national institutions. 

Anonymous - March 8, 2004
 
 Consumers are becoming more and more selective about what they buy, and they are becoming more dedicated to quality products. Companies, like individuals, must assume their share of responsibility when it comes to our nation's health.

As more and more consumers are learning the real dangers of portion sizes, artificial additives, sweeteners, colorings and preservatives, weight gain is not the only concern. It's about the connection to disease, the rising costs in health care, and the perceptions and values that have changed since September 11th. These are very real issues, and like it or not, the fast food and junk food glory days as we know it are dwindling. It's obvious, rather you choose to see it or not.

As a research analyst, I know that a successful brand follows consumer perceptions and markets accordingly. Not only those perceptions of the past, but those of the present -- and consumer trends for the future. McDonald's is aware of consumer perceptions. Soon 'super size' portions will not be available. Whole Foods is aware of consumer perceptions, and profits are soaring.

Food manufacturers and fast food companies that will be successful in the future will not be the pizza joint that only offers the traditional pizza. Success lies in those companies that offers a vast range of choices, both healthy and affordable. Because marketing a brand targeted to consumer perceptions is what made these companies successful in the first place. 

Kimberly, Research Analyst - March 8, 2004
 
 Indulgence is king! Fast, Taste & Convenience rule the actions of consumers. I was amused to see the 'leave it' results because consumers (me included) all wish to lead a healthy life. So, the premise of the discussion is jaded. Many have tried to build 'Healthy' Chains and failed.

Do not blame price or the brands! They merely serve the experience their guests demand. Imagine a movie theater lobbied to play the educational movies everyone feels they should watch but NEVER pay for.

Commend the big brands for their recent efforts with wonderful chicken sandwiches and salads by actually buying them, and manage your own health. They all provide detailed food analysis. We make our own choices and America chooses to live for the moment. 'low fat' & 'healthy' are death to any concept until America voices a different opinion at the wallet.

Our firm has designed and built phenomenal healthy concepts and they’re either one-hit-wonders or impossible to replicate. I love to see these entrepreneurs challenging us to 'put your money where your mouth is'.  

Shaun Weston, CEO, Modular Brand Group, LLC (www.GrowYourBrand.com) - March 8, 2004
 
 Do any of you remember the McLean? Think back to 1992. It did not do well. Was this an idea before its time? Is there such a thing as healthy fast food? 
Anonymous - March 8, 2004
 
 Hasn't anyone there ever eaten at Chipotle?

... One of the fastest growing "fast casual" food chains in the country. Niman Ranch beef and Bell & Evans Chicken (no hormones - no antibiotics, farm raised, etc.) meats. 

Kay Sterling, Local Marketing, Chipotle - March 8, 2004
 
 If you find this debate interesting, you may also want to check out the recent USA Today article "You Want It Your Way" published online 3/4/04. The article mentions multiple food companies that are making big steps in the food industry including Whole Foods, Frito Lay, Tropicana and Starbucks. The article also does a great job at showing how we are fast becoming a "buyer aware" culture in the U.S. 
Kimberly - March 8, 2004
 
 Fast food restaurants rely on heavy users, people who eat at such restaurants 3 or more times/week, for the bulk of their profits. This segment is likely to be under-interested in healthy items. By offering healthy items, will fast food restaurants suddenly appeal to people who prefer healthier food? Probably not, as it is the equivalent of a dollar store offering a "Whole Foods Market" experience. The people wanting the real experience are going to go where they can get, the real is preferred over the ersatz. 
Richard Layman, Urban Revitalization Consultant, Washington DC - March 8, 2004
 
 There's definitely a demand for tasty, convenient, and satisfying food -- food that hits the spot and provides us with a bit of indulgence. If providers of these foods can achieve that using ingredients that are healthy, too; they may be on to a winner. Trying to pass off a salad with a water-filled lettuce leaf with a hormone-laden bit of chicken boobing about on top as "healthy" misses the mark completely: it is neither tasty, satisfying, indulgent or is it healthy.

Who exactly are those "healthy" dishes intended to appeal to? 

Gordon Graham, Trainer, Orxil.com Business Training - March 8, 2004
 
 When the truth is overwhelming, people prefer to stick to the lies. Why? Because it is easier that way. The MDC's MultiDeathCorporations have a big plan they are going for the 'Kill' pouring their millions to make us live in the Matrix of lies, sickness and deceit. There is however hope as people are waking up to their big conspiracy.

Healthy and organic are also becoming a big marketing ploy used by big corporation benefiting big time from this wave of consiousness. For every action there is a reaction. We need to continue on fighting the battle. Ultimately we shall prevail, an irony cannot last for too long.

Do the Multi Death fast food corporations have a plan? 

Elie Domit, Conscious Citizen - March 9, 2004
 
 In Brazil it is a little bit different from the other countries. There are some institutes that should be responsible for scientifically analyzing what we are really taking home for dinner, lunch or breakfast. And they do. But can you imagine that the most biggest industries that make the media go on investing millions of dollars in advertising never appear in that health research?! It makes people think those industries are perfectly normal, so, why stopping buy their products? So, we feel very happy and keep paying less for a low quality food, even not knowing that it is a low quality product.

We believe in strong brands and sometimes what they say becomes some kind of law. And that is a good thing when they tell the truth. But let me take for example the jam industry. How many people know we are not buying a pure strawberry jam, but some kind of food that concentrates lots of apple, artificial colouring and aroma and just a little bit of strawberry? And i didn´t mention how some of those industries conserve those fruits. Believe me, you wouldn't like to know. 

Laura Rizzo Amaral, consultant, Brandcom - March 10, 2004
 
 People buy burgers because are tasty, not for being cheap. The lowest income layer is not the biggest contributor to obese army; as elsewhere, is one's choice to be 150 kg as to smoke 3 packs or drink 75 cl whiskey/day. Is Burger King a killing product or a distrustful brand? No; they should better inform consumers on the ingredients and intakes, and leave them to choose. 
Anonymous - March 11, 2004
 
 As long as the food is cheap people don´t care. That´s the problem. Habits are hard to kill. 
Ib Lenneke, Advisor, The IBIDEA Company - March 12, 2004
 
 I believe that consumers in more affluent countries (and i include the US here) would be willing to pay more for better quality and healthier eats.

The marketplace will demand better quality food, and the food brands and fast food restaurants that have no reputation for it will perish. 

Foodie - March 17, 2004
 
 The inevitable global contamination of gentically modified organisms, constant irradiation and lack of real choice within the food nationals ensures that no food is truly 'pure' anyway, so what's the difference between Sainsbury's 'Taste the Difference' and a McBurger?

Ethics are arguably the only distinction, in which case give me a Co-op any day. Health-wise, only organic farmers and fair traders need apply. The question of price is fascist and intolerable considering every person in the UK who reads this and/or buys the products will be in the wealthiest 3% of the world's population. 

Marie Maurer, Account Executive/Copywriter - March 18, 2004
 
 Food brands are here to stay but the market will shift from the more affluent countries of the U.S. to emerging economies like India, China. The natives of these countries are moving towards fast food culture and there lies opportunity for major food brands to give a traditional product mix, good quality at affordable prices. 
Nitin Nandrajog, MBA, IIFT - March 19, 2004
 
 In my opinion the debate about fast food is misdirected. Fast food has been around for time immemorial. Every country and culture has its own version of fast food. Therefore it is not fast food but the fast food brands that are under attack.

A multinational selling a pita bread sandwich with meat filling will come under severe scrutiny while the next door shop would get away with anything.

Therefore, the big corporations should be conscious of contents of their serving in terms of hygiene and nutrional values to protect their brands rather than the commodity they sell. 

Zakir Ahmed - March 22, 2004
 
 The issue is not food, rather it is responsiblity among consumers. Americans are vastly irresponsible, selfish and greedy. Super-size meals, all-u-can-eat buffets, and double cheeseburgers exemplify these traits. 'Fast food' is not the culprit. Nearly all American restaurants serve oversized portions of food - healthy or not.

Americans consume. They consume gasoline, cigarettes, alcohol and food - vast quantities of each. They consume automobiles, clothing, technology, and services. Our culture consumes more goods than any other country creating the largest economy in the world. However, as consumer society we expect businesses to solve our social issues.

Businesses create products which consumers demand. Brands which do not meet this demand fail. Therefore it's plain to see that obesity and health problems are caused from overeating consumers - not businesses, their products, or marketing plans. Brands must continue to serve over-sized portions until the consumer changes.

We already are seeing a shift in consumer behavior. Brands such as Subway have rapidly grown to compete with the burger brands over the past 10 years. 'Get thin fast' diets are hot topics. Organic produce has created a new category in the supermarkets, even spawning entire new retail brands such as Whole Foods and Wild Oats.

Even in this new found 'faith' you can see our lasting consumer culture. Subway serves 'foot long' sandwiches, potato chips, soft drinks, and over-sized cookies. The Atkin's diet is under fire for its health liabilities, and the traditional grocers are by far and wide still the norm with limited organic products.

In the end, every brand must stand for something, even if it is grease, sugar, and salt. Burger King's latest campaign embraces its core brand identity - 'have it your way'. This is very responsible marketing. It's honest. 

Bill Abel, Brand Strategist, William Morrison Abel - March 22, 2004
 
 Conventional wisdom tells us: 'You are what you eat'. Reality shows us: 'You are what you think you eat'. A small but substantial difference when addressing a 'food brands' debate. 
Sérgio Henrique Santos, Consultant - March 23, 2004
 
 I do not think eating establishments of any kind should feel obligated to overhaul their brand or their menu simply because most people have become apathetic about their health, and have tossed discipline to the wayside when it comes to eating and exercise.

I live in a smallish town, am an active vegetarian--yet not an avid cook--and I find plenty of alternative choices to the typical fast food chains that seem to be causing such an uproar.

I believe people possess willpower and common sense, but if they choose not to use it, that is their own problem. I do however feel sorry for the children that are raised by the increasing number of people that believe they are not accountable for their actions.

This atrocious, debilitating attitude is the root of the problem, the fast food debacle is only a small manifestation of our decomposing culture. 

Anonymous - March 23, 2004
 
 People today are generally lazier than they have ever been. We are impatient too. We shout at our computers when programs take more than 5 seconds to open, we dont even wait for our microwave to beep before taking out the soggy slop we are warming up in a floppy plastic tray. Fast food retailers (the likes of McDonalds, super markets etc) exploit our lazyness, tempting us with wafting smells and peppering our highstreets with outlets. Avoiding them is like walking through a minefield. Why spend time making your dishes dirty when you can have a quick fix to curb your hunger. Fast food brands are here to make food as cheaply as possible and sell as much as possible. The bottom line is profit. If people want something then they will continue to buy it, even if they know its bad for them. These brands have a huge influence our lives, they have a responsibility to change our habits for the better. After all, they have made us what we are today. Lazier...and fatter. 
Lee Newham, Creative Director, IF - March 23, 2004
 
 Where does fast food retailing go from here? Fairtrade Burger King? McAtkins? Kentucky Fat-free Chicken? WARNINGS on high fat foods as on cigarettes? A ban on fast food advertising? OR should we just put a tax on high fat foods as recently suggested by a government think tank? Or should be do it the democratic way and just get people to make up their own mind? In that case, shouldn't we have Nutritional information on the burgers we buy? Can we make a difference by charging lower fees for design, marketing and advertising to low fat high quality food brands? It would be nice to make a difference...for good. 
Lee Newham, Creative Director, IF - March 23, 2004
 
 While fast food (I'm referring to the 'unhealthy variety') and cigarettes have similarities when it comes to health-risk issues, I think most people would agree that comparing them is no different than that of apples to oranges.

Yes, there is a serious health issue that needs to be addressed...and yes, people might want a healthier option--but that would still largely depend on how those healthier options would compare to what we've been used to in terms of taste.

Consumers the world over are becoming increasingly demanding, but along with everything else, I think the future of fast food lies not in offering the healthiest products, but in offering the best compromise. Lessen the calories little by little, but work doubly hard on the taste.

At the end of the day, no fast food brand would survive on a commercial scale if it can't satisfy the world's taste buds, not even if it's as healthy as it gets. I, for one, would rather live 50 'delicious' years than a 'tasteless' life ten times longer. Wouldn't all of you? 

Paul C. Pe Benito, Marketing Officer - March 24, 2004
 
 I believe that big fast food names such as McDonalds can afford to offer two types of menu: one that is healthy; another that is satisfying although less healthy. Leave the choice to the people, but give them a choice. This gives fast food brands competitive advantage and relatively good name. 
Sherry Oh, Student, Communications & PR, Monash University - March 28, 2004
 
 
     
  back to debate