You remember “pink slime,” right? Earlier this year, this PR fiasco in the food industry revealed a huge communication challenge (or, let’s call it an opportunity) for both brands and consumers. And the lesson goes beyond the food industry.
(A refresher: pink slime was the moniker given to lean finely textured beef, a beef byproduct sanitized with ammonia that was added to ground beef products to reduce fat content.) At its core, the controversy centered on duplicity—the willing withholding of information about a product. What created such outrage is that people simply didn’t know that it was being added to the ground beef or prepared hamburgers that they were purchasing. Why? Because LFTB is pure beef, and USDA regulations did not require it to be labeled separately. Consumers felt duped, and they were outraged.
photo by Polycart, used under Creative Commons attribution license
In so many niches, marketers throw around words so much that they become ubiquitous and ultimately, confusing. Like the term ‘natural’ (and the word ‘organic’ before it) it’s lost much of its meaning. The USDA defines ‘natural’ this way:
A product containing no artificial ingredient or added color and is only minimally processed. Minimal processing means that the product was processed in a manner that does not fundamentally alter the product. The label must include a statement explaining the meaning of the term natural (such as “no artificial ingredients; minimally processed”).
Brands often tag products ‘natural’ as a shorthand for ‘healthy,’ ‘safe’ or ‘quality.’ But those words don’t necessarily equate. Pink slime is natural. So is high-fructose corn syrup. So is yogurt loaded with sugar.
B2C brands that deliver highly technical products and services are also guilty of hiding behind complex language. Take this sentence as an example, from an IT provider in my city:
Using virtualization technologies, multiple server operating systems are encapsulated to run across a pool of highly available servers. This enhances average server utilization and availability.
Huh?
Talking over customers’ heads isn’t just disrespectful—it creates confusion that muddies the sell-buy relationship. And customer confusion is bad for branding.
Any brand in any market—whether product or service, big or small, global or local—is wise to learn a lesson from pink slime: Customers crave—and deserve—clarity. In any market where the common language has been corrupted or become jargon-y, brands that cut through the BS with clear, straightforward communication truly stand out. People embrace brands that don’t pull the wool over their eyes.
Look at the industries you serve: Are there opportunities for your brand or your clients to rise above simply through language? Can you decipher complex messages, decode jargon-filled descriptions of products or services? There’s opportunity—and, I’d argue, obligation—in clarity.
Worth Reading
The Proposed Nutrition Label:
Commissioned by The New York Times, Werner Design Werks of Minneapolis created a prototype for a new food label that accounts for nutrition, sustainability, processing and production.
FTC Issues Advice on Eco Labeling:
From nutritionist Marion Nestle, an update on new Federal Trade Commission guidelines for brands using words like ‘natural’ and ‘sustainable.’
Worth Eating
Better Than Store-Bought:
My Better Than Store-Bought recipe series teaches you how to create homemade—and excellent!—versions of common store-bought items. My homemade granola bar recipe rocks.