There’s an article in today’s Wall Street Journal about how Kraft Foods is modifying its advertising of less-than-healthy processed food to kids. Kraft’s motives are base. As an affiliate of tobacco giant Philip Morris, Kraft knows a few things about public relations spin. Thus, Michael Mudd, the architect of Kraft’s obesity strategy, made the following connection between tobacco and food marketing:
If the tobacco industry could go back 20 or 30 years, reform their marketing, disarm their critics, and sacrifice a couple of hundred million in profits, knowing what they know today, don’t you think they’d take that deal in a heartbeat?
From a law and economics perspective, it seems that product liability law is not working here as it should. The potential costs of product liability litigation are causing Kraft to plow resources into an “aversion” or “avoision” strategy of “crafty” marketing. The threat of such costs should instead drive Kraft to invest in safer, healthier products. From a natural law perspective, the problem is even more grave: Kraft wants to invest in deception rather than good old fashioned honest products. Either way, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth.