this post was submitted on 06 Oct 2023
212 points (95.7% liked)

News

22869 readers
4211 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Wendy’s and McDonald’s have emerged victorious from a lawsuit that accused the fast food chains of false advertising.

A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit brought against the two companies accusing them of selling smaller hamburgers than advertised and alleging the food didn’t look as appetizing in person as pictured on their websites.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Cheradenine@sh.itjust.works 121 points 11 months ago (5 children)

Only because 'everyone does it'

"US District Judge Hector Gonzalez ruled that Wendy’s and McDonald’s food images “are no different than other companies’ use of visually appealing images to foster positive associations with their products.”

Italics mine

[–] Salamendacious@lemmy.world 59 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Ahh yes the rarely used "jump off a bridge reversal" defense. If everyone jumped off a bridge would you do it too? Of course!

[–] zerofk@lemm.ee 9 points 11 months ago

At the very least I’d start checking for a monster chasing them off the bridge.

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 41 points 11 months ago

"Systemic problems are OK!"

[–] snooggums@kbin.social 28 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Everyone does drugs, can we stop punishing people for it?

[–] sock@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

woah woah woah how would we enslave minorities if we decriminalized drugs

be a little more empathetic to slave owners (prisons and by proxy the politicians) please

[–] quindraco@lemm.ee 6 points 11 months ago (13 children)

If you replace your underscores with asterisks, emphasis/italics should work as intended.

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] Pips@lemmy.film 6 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (6 children)

Not really, that's a minor part of the opinion. The more important part is they tell you how much food you're going to get of what kind and then they give you that food. I don't think anyone would be able to win a case on "my burger didn't look like the burger in the ad" because every burger looks a little different. Lots of things that are the same don't look the same and let's not suddenly pretend we get McDonalds for the appearance. They'd win false advertising if, say, a quarter pounder was only 2 oz.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] tacosanonymous@lemm.ee 44 points 11 months ago (2 children)

America proves once again that we will allow just about anything if it makes corpos money.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Shazbot@lemmy.world 32 points 11 months ago (8 children)

The advertising angle is likely what sank their case. Proving the food does not meet a technical specification, like not having a quarter pound of beef in a fully cooked patty, is easier to prove. But advertising has always been hyperbole.

[–] 2ncs@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

A very important aspect that I think people overlook is that they use similar/same marketing photos of the food on their menu. That's not advertising, maybe that's what they will argue. If I look at a menu and they have a picture of the food, I'm going to expect I get what I see (within a margin) vs when I see an advertisement I expect it to be a bit hyperbolic.

[–] irmoz@reddthat.com 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

You could argue that menus are just in-store advertising

[–] 2ncs@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

A lot of things in stores have to add disclaimers about what is on the cover of the box vs what's on the inside. I don't see how fast food gets a pass on that. Or why people are just okay with it too.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 28 points 11 months ago

Hurray, they can keep showing us inedible objets d'art in food adverts!

[–] alienanimals@lemmy.world 26 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

The law favors corporate giants rather than real people? How surprising. Fuck McDonalds and Wendys

[–] Salamendacious@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago (6 children)

I feel a little guilty because while I rarely eat fast food anymore Wendy's is my favorite

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Adalast@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

Now, just to add more shit to that sandwich, remember what you said when you read that the Supreme Court has ruled several times that police officers ONLY duty is to uphold the law, and they have no duty or obligation to protect the citizens they police.

[–] Pat_Riot 23 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Did anyone really believe the corporate judge would do any differently?

[–] Salamendacious@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago

Absolutely not. I remember when this was filled and I thought, "well this will be dismissed soon"

[–] BruceTwarzen@kbin.social 7 points 11 months ago

Poor guy now has to take care of a new yacht

[–] gmtom@lemmy.world 21 points 11 months ago (1 children)

"Case dismissed"

The judge said through a mouth full of big mac before banging his gavel and taking a completely unrelated briefcase full of money that the defendants just happened leave around.

[–] Salamendacious@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

That's an amazing visual

[–] randomaside@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 11 months ago (1 children)

"This is so backwards" one would think and then one realizes that all advertising is deception.

The judge tacitly acknowledges this truth.

[–] Pips@lemmy.film 6 points 11 months ago

I dunno, seems like the judge is explicitly acknowledging it.

[–] _haha_oh_wow_@sh.itjust.works 15 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Just, uh, stop giving these shitty companies your money and uh, problem solved!

[–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Ah yes, if only we did this one easy thing! It so easy!

If it was that easy/simple they would be out of business already. Unfortunately reality doesn't always line up with these "simple" solutions, as evidence by.... reality.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] LilB0kChoy@lemm.ee 3 points 11 months ago

No. I'm, I'm simply saying that life, uh... finds a way.

[–] charonn0@startrek.website 11 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The technical term is "puffery", which the FTC defines as "exaggerations reasonably to be expected of a seller as to the degree of quality of his product, the truth or falsity of which cannot be precisely determined."

[–] Salamendacious@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

I just recently became aware of that term. Thanks!

[–] downpunxx@kbin.social 7 points 11 months ago

they won, we all lost

[–] Vlyn@lemmy.zip 7 points 11 months ago (8 children)

I'm honestly confused. Didn't they show off before that they use the actual ingredients when doing photoshoots? Like no plastic or anything, just making the burger + good lighting, otherwise it's false advertising?

Of course if you then stick that burger into a tight squished wrapper it won't look the same, compared to serving it on a plate and setting it up nicely.

[–] Salamendacious@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I think you're right I think some of the complaints was the advertisements show more ingredients in the sandwich so they appear larger than they actually are.

Non food items are allowed in commercials but not for the advertised product. The example I heard was Cheerios can use white glue as the milk in a cereal bowl because Cheerios don't sell milk. I need to look this stuff up more though.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Binthinkin@kbin.social 4 points 11 months ago

When they’re ALL WRONG they gotta be right right?

load more comments
view more: next ›