Summary
Anna Tollison has filed a class action lawsuit against Subway, claiming its Steak & Cheese sandwich is falsely advertised to appear as if it contains 200% more meat than it actually does.
Tollison alleges that Subway’s misleading advertising causes consumers to overpay, which is concerning due to inflation.
Her lawyer said that while such cases often face dismissal, if this one proceeds, it could lead to compensation and class certification, allowing affected customers to seek refunds for the alleged misrepresentation.
Not defending Subway, but food advertisement / photography uses all sorts of dirty tricks to make it look more appealing. What’s photographed may not even be edible.
It’s possible the amount of meat is the same in the photo but just shoved and piled up on the side to look like more.
Example: https://shotkit.com/food-photography-secrets-revealed/
That said, advertisements should be forced to accurately represent what you’ll be served and not an idealized version of it.
In countries like Japan, this is enforced, and what it looks like on the package has to match what it looks like in real life, down to size and shape. They aren’t allowed to “enlarge to show texture” or show it smaller than it is, either.
100% correct!
They even max insanely high quality wax replicas of the food they serve… and when you get your food, it looks EXACTLY LIKE the replicas hahahaha
https://youtube.com/shorts/GnGR7IfT4XM?si=6yGf_cNeJeoLmG2L
I’ll offer that this seems to be (somewhat?) true in Canada as well. The pic on the menu was pretty much exactly what I received on my plate. I was surprised because I’m used to the usual “glamor shots” you get on US menus, the perfectly plated dish vs the whatever you actually get. The menu photo seems much more realistic in Canada.
In most other countries outside the US they are forced to be honest. It’s still an idealised version, but you wouldn’t be able to get away with showing double meat in Europe.
When I was a kid, HBO did a special for kids about deceptive advertising practices- imagine that today. They did a whole segment on food photography and showed people doing things like making ice cream out of vegetable shortening and food coloring. The whole thing fascinated me.
Edit: Found it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LaVM2XG4wvE Apparently it was originally a Consumer Reports thing and this is the VHS version. But I saw it on HBO and HBO made a big deal out of it at the time.
Damn… it’s amazing how well I remember this despite not having seen it since probably 1990.
We had a curriculum in school identifying different types of propaganda in advertising. They had us bring in ads from magazines and sort through how they were trying to sell us things. Likewise, I can’t imagine that still being taught today. Seems like it would be one of the first casualties of the modern American way of defunding education.
We learned things a long those lines a couple times when I was in highschool not that long ago, but I also went to a weird highschool so I’m not sure how much that generalizes
Whats a magazine?
It’s like a disposable book, with ads.
So they used to just throw Kindles in the trash?!
Dude, stfu lol. I was taught that in the last 3 years. Just because you “can’t imagine” doesn’t mean it isn’t.
Fair point. I’m honestly glad to know it’s still being taught, what with the defunding of education in America and everything. It will serve you well.
But seriously, shut your mouth and learn from your elders. You don’t know what you don’t know, and you’re over-confident about what you think you do. You know how I know? I was you, twenty years ago.
Was that a special on HBO or was it a segment on Dave Coulier’s Out of Control (which is where I personally was first exposed to the idea)?
I loved that show too, but no. Definitely the special I linked to.
Incidentally, Diz McNally from that show used to run a newsstand at Hollywood and Vine in L.A. for years. I would see her all the time when I lived nearby.
I thought ice cream (and a lot of other thing in the ads) was usually mashed potatoes.
I don’t know. Not according to that guy in the show.
If I recall, the rule in the US is that the primary food being advertised must be real food, so cereal might have glue instead of milk, because you’re not selling the milk. But you can prop it up and cherry-pick as much as you like.
You could style the meat in your sub to look like the ad… but you’d probably find that you have to stack it all up at the edge.
Even with that reasoning, at some point you’ve gone way too far into fraud. This may be it: it doesn’t look possible to make the actual meat look anything like the marketing photo.
Yeah, my first thought was the advertisement probably didn’t include anything that was actually food.
Of course, the definition of food seems to keep changing as the decades pass by.
Of course, Subway sandwiches don’t contain any actual food either. :)
https://www.npr.org/2020/10/03/919831116/irish-court-rules-subway-bread-is-not-real-bread
https://www.vice.com/en/article/judge-dismisses-dollar210-million-lawsuit-against-cbc-report-that-said-subway-chicken-is-fake/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/food/2021/01/27/subway-tuna-lawsuit/
My second job was as a “Sandwich Artist.”
I’m aware, more so than some others.
Also, if you like tuna fish sandwiches there has been a long standing question of whether or not there is actual tuna in their cans. But what I can say, with certainty, at least when I worked there, that the recipe was 90% shitty mayo and very little anything else.