Apparently we’re all exempt from reading government-mandated nutrition labels on our own.
Two moms sued Ferrero USA because they claimed the advertising of the popular European spread led them to believe the product was healthy as it contains hazlenuts, skim milk powder, and cocoa powder.
Apparently they never noticed it was sweet.
Seriously, who fails to understand that even though something contains healthy ingredients, it might not be the best choice? From American Thinker:
The origins of the suits (one for California, the other for the rest of the country) started with an epiphany that plaintiff Athena Hohenberg of San Diego experienced last year. The mother of a 4-year-old said she was “shocked” to learn Nutella chocolate spread was in fact loaded with calories and sugar, even though its advertising noted that it contained some wholesome products — hazelnuts, skim milk and such. It’s unclear how this epiphany occurred. Could it be that Hohenberg finally bothered to look on the ingredients that Nutella always had on the back of its labels?
As the mother of a four year-old, I’m shocked that another mother could be so stupid as to argue in a court of law that she’s completely incompetent to feed her children without being supposedly swayed by false advertising. Read. The. Label.
Who gets fattest (metaphorically speaking, of course) off the $3.5 million settlement? 25% goes to the lawyers. The rest of the idiots incapable of reading and making a decision can apply for $20 bucks, enough to buy 5 more jars of Nutella. What’s next? The total ban of food advertising? Or a section of the grocery stores of all the “bad” stuff?
By the way: I don’t bother with bread for Nutella. I just lick the spoon. With glee.