[ CYPHER CODE #1685 ]
Strawberry products should contain enough strawberry to justify the label.

[ CYPHER CODE #1686 ]
Big Food uses bright labels to sell what the ingredient list barely supports.

[ CYPHER CODE #1687 ]
Courts protect food companies when they sell shoppers fake fruit.

BRIEFING

Jett here. If a box screams “strawberry,” shows strawberry-colored filling, and sells itself like a fruity breakfast treat, most normal people would assume there’s a decent amount of strawberry involved, right? Crazy concept, I know. But apparently in America’s food system, the front of the package can flirt with reality while the ingredient list files for divorce from it. Let’s get into it.

Who doesn't like a strawberry Pop-Tart? Well, maybe some don't, but a lot of Americans do. And some people actually eat them, thinking they might be getting some fruit in their diet. Well, think again, guys...

Kellogg’s has faced legal heat over their weird strawberries. A lawsuit argued that its strawberry Pop-Tarts gave consumers the impression they were getting more strawberry than they actually were. And when you look at the ingredient list, the whole thing does read like a really bad red dye magic trick.

The problem in the US is that our food marketing is one big free-for-all. Companies can build entire products around a fruit, flavor, color, image, and name, while the actual ingredient barely shows up in the product. Then when consumers complain, the system shrugs and acts like everybody should know processed food is basically fake anyway.

And that’s where I think this whole thing gets really ugly. Because if labels can stretch the truth that far, and courts won’t step in when the marketing clearly gives people one impression, and the ingredients tell another story, then how exactly are we supposed to clean up American food? You can’t fix a food system where the package is allowed to sell some healthy fantasy and the fine print tells the icky truth.

SOURCE

Kellogg’s strawberry-flavored Pop-Tarts need more strawberries, according to a lawsuit filed against the company in August.

A class-action lawsuit, filed by Anita Harris in the Southern District of Illinois, argues that the Kellogg Sales Company is misleading consumers by promoting the breakfast pastry’s strawberry filling in its labels and marketing, giving an impression that the fruit filling contains "a greater relative and absolute amount of strawberries than it does.”

In reality, the company’s “Frosted Strawberry Toaster Pastries” contain 2% or less of “dried strawberries, dried pears, dried apples” and “red 40,” according to its nutrition label.

Harris claims the Pop-Tarts “cannot provide a true strawberry taste” since it is overwhelmed by “significant amounts” of pears and apples, and says the red food coloring gives consumers “the false impression” that the pastries contain more strawberries.

That lawsuit should’ve rattled the entire processed food industry, because it shows the scam: the front of the box is a lie. Strawberry becomes “strawberry-ish.” Fruit becomes filler, and color becomes a delightful little suggestion. And somehow through this clever little word salad, the consumer is supposed to decode everything while standing in a grocery aisle with kids screaming for breakfast junk.

Sure...

But the follow-up on this court case is even crazier and really toasted my pastry.

SOURCE

The class-action lawsuit against Kellogg's alleging that strawberry Pop-Tarts contained too few strawberries and too many other fruits (like pears and apples) was dismissed by a federal judge in April 2022, not settled.Why was it dismissed? US District Judge Andrew Carter ruled that a reasonable shopper would not expect strawberries to be the only ingredient in a processed, sugary toaster pastry.

That ruling says a lot more than it probably meant to.

The court didn’t exactly restore consumer trust here, did it? No. They basically confirmed the depressing reality of the American grocery aisle... processed food is so shoddy, so artificial, and so loosey-goosey marketed that a judge can look at “strawberry” branding and rule that any "reasonable shopper" should already know not to expect too much real strawberry.

Excuse me?

Our food system has gotten so fake that believing the label is almost treated like your mistake. Like, "wow, you're an idiot for thinking there was actual strawberry in that thing..."

And that is how Big Food wins. The marketing gets to be bright, emotional, fruity, wholesome, and kid-friendly, while the legal defense gets to be cold and technical. Come on, nobody really thought this sugary toaster pastry was packed with strawberries, did they? What are you guys smoking? Strawberries, ha ha ha, sucker!

The consumer gets sold the illusion, then blamed for actually believing it.

That brings us to the clip making the rounds about Kellogg’s and processed “strawberry” products.

Now, heads-up, this clip goes way harder than the lawsuit, so let’s be clear. We’re not treating every scary chemical phrase as gospel just because it sounds good on a YouTube video. But the reason clips like this blow up is because Americans already know something is way off with their food. They’ve been marketed fruit-flavored products that barely resemble fruit for so long that when someone starts talking about factory additives, dyes, gums, and “wallpaper” compounds, people don’t laugh it off. They think, “Honestly, that sounds about right.”

SOURCE

DEBRIEFING

The real damage Big Food has done is destroying trust. They've trained Americans to expect deception and then acted shocked when people started asking what the hell is actually in the food.

The front of the box is just a pipe dream, and the courts don't care.

That's a pretty brutal standard. If a company can build a product around “strawberry,” use color and branding to make it feel fruit-based, and then defend itself by saying no reasonable person should expect much real fruit in processed food, we're all in big trouble.

NOW YOU KNOW

You can’t clean up American food while the system lets Big Food stretch the label, bury the truth, and blame shoppers for believing what they were sold.