The Men Who Made Us Fat

I watched the final episode of the programme "The Men Who Made Us Fat" on BBC2 last night and did get very frustrated about the continual criticism of marketing throughout it. Whilst in principle I can agree with the contention that the food industry is concerned with making money for shareholders (it is their primary responsibility, after all), I do not entirely agree that is all down to marketing that people buy the high fat foods, and as ever that is using the word marketing for promotion rather than the broader aspects it should cover.

It does seem potentially short sighted of the food companies to produce products which can cause obesity and therefore reduce the life of their customers, however. Surely they should want to help the customers to live longer and therefore make more money from them over a long period of time. But is it really the fault of marketing that people want to buy quick and simple to prepare, tasty food at low prices even if it is very processed? Isn't the marketing response one of providing that to meet the lifestyles people lead rather than convincing people it is what they need?


The problem comes with the potentially misleading labelling which suggest things may be healthy when they are not particularly so, but again, if people want to see that something has fruit in it and it does why not state that? If everything else is on the label is it not the customer's fault for not reading it and seeing the reality? I am a believer in freedom of choice provided the customer is well informed rather than the regulation which was being suggested by the programme, but that does rely on educating customers as to what things really mean and that is where I do think the food producers and retailers are failing. 


But it isn't all the fault of marketing!


For the moment the programme can be viewed here - BBC iPlayer

Laws against marketing

Not a crime against marketing in terms of the use of the word, but a crime against marketing in terms of the ability of marketers to do their job.

Today the UK government have made an announcement which goes against marketing, and the freedom of marketers within organisations both large and small. I am referring to the ban on open display of tobacco products in shops. I am not a smoker and therefore have no axe to grind on that score, but I do think this is a government imposition which is a crime against marketing. Tobacco companies have already had the freedom to advertise taken away from them so they can't tell anyone they exist, now the innocent act of displaying products which are legally allowed to be sold is to be made illegal.

I am not sure I believe that this will actually harm small shopkeepers - I think that those who smoke are not influenced particularly at the point of sale to suddenly decide to buy some cigarettes, and neither can I imagine that anyone ever started smoking just because the shop they were in had cigarettes on display. Somehow, despite what Alan Johnson, Health Secretary, says I suspect peer pressure plays a much larger part.

However, my real issue is that this is going to take away another element of marketing from the tobacco companies, and retailers. If it suits the powers that be, who knows what they may restrict next - should we really allow this to happen?

While the product is legally allowed to be sold, surely the manufacturer and retailer should be allowed to tell customers, current and potential, that the product is available. Maybe what I have said about the lack of impact of point of sale displays indicates that these are not making a difference to the sales level through the promotional element of marketing - that may be the case, but it should not be taken away as a small part of that promotional effort.

At least they have not stopped branding of packaging as had been suggested - now that would be a major crime against marketing....

Details of the story available here