By Jennie
A recent lawsuit has illustrated once again the importance of the old maxim caveat emptor – “let the buyer beware.” The Center for Science in the Public Interest, a non-profit public interest group, is suing Coca-Cola over what they call “deceptive and unsubstantiated (health) claims” that advertising for their Vitaminwater product allegedly makes. Coca-Cola’s attorneys are defending their company in court papers by stating that “no consumer could reasonably be misled into thinking Vitaminwater was a healthy beverage.”
This, in spite of the fact that the name of the product certainly implies health benefits, and the advertising touts the product as “support(ing) a healthy body.” Also, the various flavors have names like “Revive”, “Defense” and “Focus”, as well as others that suggest consumption of these drinks confers physical and mental benefits.
Do corporations such as Coca-Cola have any responsibility to be truthful in their advertising? Or is all fair in the pursuit of sales? Some would argue that you only need look at the nutritional information on the label of a bottle of Vitaminwater to know that it’s not healthy. One bottle contains 33 grams of sugar and 125 calories, making it more akin to a soft drink than a health drink in terms of sugar and calories. The vitamins included in a serving are synthetic, which some would argue means they are less effective than natural vitamins (there are also claims that synthetic vitamins can be harmful to some people).
So, again – caveat emptor. Some would say it’s the consumer’s responsibility to know what they are eating and drinking. Requirements on labeling products with nutritional information goes part way to educating the public. But say you are a 15-year-old who has decided that you want to eat healthier, perhaps lose weight and gain energy. Will you know what “33 grams of sugar” means? Without some context, you have no way of knowing that that is a lot of sugar. Further, you have to be savvy enough to read the portion information and multiply the 13 grams of sugar listed on the label by the two and a half servings supposedly contained therein.
I’m sure that there will be those who will cry “personal responsibility”, but noting the restrictions on tobacco and liquor advertising, I can see the merits of restricting deceptive advertising for products that promotes obesity, which is a huge health problem in America today. What do you think?
Loading ...
Comments
24 Responses to Vitaminwater: Untruth in Advertising
personal responsibility ….end of story.
I take it you think they should allow unrestricted liquor and cigarette advertising, then?
I think their should be truthh in advertising. I know some very health-minded people who LOVE this vitamin water and think the vitamin additives really do what the label implies. How are they supposed to know otherwise? Are regular consumers supposed to conduct scientific testing to see if the label claims are true?
I am not talking about the sugar/calories now. They know and understand what that info is. It’s the added vitamins + the label name (i.e., “Revive” ) that is deceptive if it is untrue. I don’t think that they could claim any personal harm by Coca Cola. They could make the case that the advertising is deceptive and therefore should be changed.
This reminds me of all those “Low-fat” products tha were so popular in the 1990′s as “diet” foods. Snackwell cookies may have been low fat, but they were NOT diet foods.
There should be truth in Advertising. When is it a persons responsibility for what they do? Please tell me when do we stop? Gov’t. tells me what I can eat, whether or not I can smoke… my car …my house…a restaurant. Enough is enough. McDonald’s being sued for Happy Meals because parents can’t say no.
Having worked with a variety of mentally challenged young adults I think I would have to be in favor of truth in advertising. I do agree with Stu that we need to be personally responsible but there seems to be quite a few people who are unable to do so.
I do not really want the government telling us what to do either however I am always for honestly in any situation. Corporations should be honest when promoting their products.
I am just wondering, has anyone ever tasted these waters? What are they like?
I had this argument with my daughter. She likes these drinks and thought they were healthy. After she read the label and fully understood it she agreed with me. Another thing that gets to me is the flavors that you add to water. If you look only at the calories it says 6 0r a low number but, if you look at serving size it says 1/2 a bottle . Who mixes half a bottle. I realize that it is still only 12 calories. It just seems deceptive.
Is low Fat Ice Cream really good for you ? Low fat COOKIES ? I think it’s a fine line of trying to put the best light on your product and being deceptive.
You must be an educated consumer.
Enticement to buy the product is one thing, misleading information and deceptive labeling is another. Yes, the buyer should be aware and beware. However, most people would use their caution when looking at the smaller companies w/outrageous claims for their products. Coca Cola is major corporation and should be fully capable of making a healthy vitamin enriched drink. To market “vitamin water” as such is false advertising and they should be called on it.
Right. They should not be allowed to imply that a drink called “vitamin water” has some ability to help you focus if it doesn’t. I don’t think that is too much to ask. Truth. The label should be true.
Cookies aren’t a diet food, but the Snackwell cookies were marketed as such.
I believe in responsibility for the consumer and the producer. Consumers should know what their dietary restrictions are, and take responsibility for their decisions. They have to rely on producers making honest claims and giving true information on their packaging.
I believe in responsibility for the consumer and the producer.
I agree. I will also say that putting aside the legal issues about untruthful advertising, can we agree that deceptive advertising is not moral? I mean, we accept it as a fact of life, but really, I think it’s just a couple of steps above being a con artist.
Paula says… If you look only at the calories it says 6 0r a low number but, if you look at serving size it says 1/2 a bottle .
That drives me bananas. I understand Americans (myself included) often have a skewed version of appropriate portion size, but I hate when I pick up a frozen meal (seemingly made for one), look at the calorie count and plop it my cart for lunch only to discover later that it is made for 2-1/2 people. Even if I can get one person to share it with me, where will we find our 1/2?!?
Lily says…Coca Cola is major corporation and should be fully capable of making a healthy vitamin enriched drink. To market “vitamin water” as such is false advertising and they should be called on it.
I completely agree. I don’t think anyone is suggesting they can’t sell the water, but even though all consumers (assuming they are mentally capable of doing so) should be wary when it comes to advertising and labeling, I do think there is a line that can be crossed where it becomes appropriate for the government to come in and tell the company to clean-up its advertising practices.
Lily says…Coca Cola is major corporation and should be fully capable of making a healthy vitamin enriched drink.
Whether or not Coca Cola is fully capable of making a vitamin water is irrelevant. That is where capitalism comes in. If you can build a better mouse trap then do it.
Even if I can get one person to share it with me, where will we find our 1/2?!?~Anya
Oh Anya, you made me laugh so hard.
Stu,Whether it be a small company or a big one, I think the accountability should be still be the same. It just irks me more when it’s a global company like Coca Cola.
McDonald’s being sued for Happy Meals because parents can’t say no.~Stu
I was talking to someone about this, my little one overheard me has been worried ever since. There’s marketing and enticement, which I have no problem with. It’s false advertising and intentionally misleading the public that I think needs to be reigned in cases like this Vitamin Water and their Dasani “especially pure” water in the UK which was treated tap water. After that fiasco and the bad publicity they have received about water rights in India, you would think they would be more careful.
If you can build a better mouse trap then do it.- Stu
You shouldn’t be able to claim you’ve built a better mousetrap if you haven’t.
Stu,Whether it be a small company or a big one, I think the accountability should be still be the same. It just irks me more when it’s a global company like Coca Cola.
Never said a company should lie to get the product out there. Big or small. It’s our responsibility to read the label. If the label is not true they should be held accountable.
I was talking to someone about this, my little one overheard me has been worried ever since. There’s marketing and enticement, which I have no problem with.
Isn’t all marketing enticement ?
You shouldn’t be able to claim you’ve built a better mousetrap if you haven’t.
Agree. That’s why you have to be “Buyer Beware”
Isn’t all marketing enticement ?~Stu
Yes.
If the label is not true they should be held accountable.~Stu
The front of the label says “vitamin water”. I see that as misleading in terms of how healthy it is for the consumer and something they can get away with. I remember Procter & Gamble getting busted for their OJ that said “fresh” and also Ragu for their pasta sauce. The FDA actually seized some amount of the OJ from the stores. There’s a line there somewhere.
The front of the label says “vitamin water”.
Don’t we have a responsibility to read the Ingredient Label if we really care what’s in a product ?
What if you are a consumer (say, a 12-year-old) who is unable to interpret the info on the label? Are you just SOL then?
Stu, it would be nice if everyone read exactly what the ingredients are. When the label is so misleading, I don’t know if all consumers will do so. There’s no need to make such false impressions w/the labeling. My main concern in this area are the products who promote health benefits when there are none.
My main concern in this area are the products who promote health benefits when there are none.
No argument here…….if the label is not true they should pay the consequences.
What if you are a consumer (say, a 12-year-old) who is unable to interpret the info on the label? Are you just SOL then?
Maybe……what kid listens or reads anything. So now what?… Should stores not sell peanuts or products with peanuts because a small minority of kids can get very sick from ingesting peanuts? There can’t be a fool proof method for everything. Like I said …if they lie they should be shut down.
I guess we’re just going to have to disagree on this – I see “personal responsibility” as extending to people who try to deceive others through dishonest advertising. Again, aside from the legal issues, I see it as a moral one. I think it’s wrong.
Damn corporation trying to make a profit on uneducated, consumers. I drink the product everytime I have a choice between water and it.