Consumers and claims: what they really think

The stories we’d heard about claims…

• Taco Bell hack

• Sugar is good

• Kyle

What we did & what we got

• 1 brief• 15 people making 4 films on their smartphones about claims. • Mix of gender & lifestage & attitude

– I'm on top of my intakes. I keep an eye on what I consume. – I don’t really look at food labelling but I'm confident that my diet

is fairly well balanced. – I think that I should improve my diet. – Food labelling gives no useful guidance to me.

• 60 films. 4000 lines of soundbites. 5 hrs. of consumers talking about health claims

Why?

We knew research didn’t have to be difficult and didn’t have to be dull

We wanted to compel & excite. To discover and distill.

Today

• Lots of consumers talking, very little of me• Show a 90s film, then talk observations

(repeat until my time is up)• Only bears a passing resemblance to your print outs (sorry)• All videos available to anyone who wants them afterwards

You’ve* opened my eyes you swines*

• 6 of one…..• Not so good news for some brands. Great news for labeling .

Opportunity: Low levels of knowledge, but importantly that knowledge, when gained does influence behaviour change.

*Watch Me Think

Suspicion: It tortures me!

• Organic = it’s costing me• No added = what else is in there

Simply put, there is suspicion of the claims, suspicion of nutrition, suspicion of ingredients, hatred of aspartame etc.

Oh Jesus, they’re traffic lights

• Linked to slide 1 – huge lack of knowledge, massive opportunity to change that. – Didn’t know– Will become obsessed

• Combination of simplicity of message and pushing the message (through the right trusted channels).

• Maybe the message is ‘red you know is bad, green yay’

Conclusion: For some who really understand, it can impact at the swaying point, but what it shows reflects on that desire for simple symbols

The confused consumer

• Confused about what they’re told• Confused about what they believe• They’re people, not scientists• I bought this yogurt because it’s free from all this and that

makes it really healthy. But it’s full of saturates. What?

Arguably some hoodwinking going on - if you have something positive to communicate, this isn’t the way to do it, but if you have something to hide, maybe this is ideal?

Nutrition: lining up the gallery of villains

• The villains are salt, sugar, saturated fat & sweeteners• Few surprises here

Perhaps that should be focused on the why?

Heroes of the glorious nutrition

• What is Natural? Natural can only possibly be good for me... They really want natural ingredients, they don’t really know what it means, but they love the claim, it’s seductive.

• General rule is that if something can be taken out, it becomes a poison - it has driven the negativity around it. If food is being based ‘free from’ something it must be bad for you. Some households in US studies we have done end up being free from gluten for no official reason….

Opportunity? The positives of nutrition: the fibre, the protein. The focus is always on stripping stuff out – what about putting stuff back in – changing the message.

The swaying point

• If it’s there, if it’s noticed, it influences• Remember you are inviting yourself to be judged on these

basic attributes….e.g. Weetabix, – not on taste, it’s on nutrition.

• Machine gun claims - if X has that and that, and Y only has this, I’ll take X. If there’s no added/reduced sugar, they’ve added sweeteners. I hate sweeteners, but in store, if it’s the one or the other, I take the no added/reduced

• Blind faith: if it says it’s BFY, then it must be• Reductionism – the 1% point sway

Trust: It’s a barren landscape

• Trust is very much split by class – Tesco vs. Dorset Cereals• Lack of knowledge can sometimes be a good thing (for

brands).– Not understanding ownership – Innocent, Jordans– Small companies not in it for profit! Eh?

• Advertising will not be trusted, but branding will blind the best of them. Brilliant challenge.

• Huge trust in the benevolent state, and very little in free enterprise, except when they’re cuddly homespun local companies like Coca-Cola and Tesco!

The comfort of old friends. The shock of the new• Current products can get away with it more – assumption that it

hasn’t killed them, hasn’t made them unhealthy etc. They’re all right Jack

• New products – checked. Even online. • Big opportunity is online, real household profiling, real clarity

around consumption based on household etc. All about convenience remember.

Consumer processing power

• Bombarded with messages• Battle with time and organization• TMI• Desire for simplification• Want to be healthy… but

Ah right, now I get what the numbers mean.

• Pretty much entirely positive reaction• Not everyone but most – eating disorders and not popular

(fair) with the over 60s.• The guilt barometer (Mars)• Understanding what it actually means.• The consensus: it’s currently mumbo jumbo and they’d like to

know ‘is it good for me?’. This helps• ‘An hour on the cross trainer for a pork pie? You must be

kidding, I’ll do without’.

Thank you (and if you want the videos)

• Alistair Vince, Chief Tinkerer, Watch Me Thinkalistair@watchmethink.com07545 596402@alistair_vince @watchmethink