Embedded Files
In modern marketing, health misinformation functions as a sophisticated tool of manipulation.
Advertisements skillfully reframe unhealthy products as nutritional necessities, exploiting consumers' knowledge gaps. By constructing narratives of familial warmth and leveraging strategic endorsements from authoritative figures, these campaigns go beyond promoting products to transform consumption into a symbol of belonging and perceived well-being.
This strategy contributes to unhealthy dietary habits and broader societal phenomena, such as commodity fetishism.
When Health Becomes a Selling Point
Health promotion has become a powerful tool for food companies to differentiate their products and attract health-conscious consumers by highlighting certain ingredients or downplaying less desirable ones. However, such claims often mask the product's full nutritional profile, leading to choices that can harm long-term health. High-sugar foods, for example, are often marketed as "natural" or "nutrient-packed," while their harmful effects, such as increased risks of obesity, diabetes, and heart disease, are ignored or hidden.
A study in Public Health Nutrition found that adolescents exposed to marketing for high-fat, salt, or sugar foods were more likely to consume these products regularly, showing a clear link between advertising and unhealthy eating habits (Critchlow et al. 2020) . Similarly, research from the WHO revealed that health claims on packaging can mislead consumers into viewing unhealthy products as beneficial, influencing their purchasing behavior (Bhatnagar, Wadia, 2022 ). Without enough protections against such deceptive practices, consumers are left vulnerable to harm, often making choices based on misinformation.
This strategy of rebranding unhealthy products as healthy is not unique to food advertising. Cigarette ads once used similar tactics, making health-related claims to sell harmful products. Both cases highlight how industries manipulate health information to prioritize profit over consumer well-being.
The Strategic Use of Authority in Advertising
As health risks associated with smoking began to gain scientific recognition in the 1950s and 1960s, the cigarette industry faced significant economic challenges. However, rather than conceding to these findings, the industry turned potential threats into opportunities through ingenious marketing strategies. As highlighted in Cigarette Nation by D.J. Robinson (2021), public relations experts employed a range of tactics to mitigate public health concerns and sustain market growth. For instance, to counter fears surrounding cancer, the industry funded medical research suggesting alternative causes, such as industrial pollution, and emphasized the probabilistic nature of cancer findings, thereby casting doubt on smoking as a direct cause. Additionally, cigarettes were reframed as stress-relievers, suggesting potential health benefits and positioning smoking as ambiguous rather than inherently harmful.
One of the most influential strategies was leveraging endorsements from doctors and scientific figures. Advertisements often claimed certain brands were "less harmful" rather than explicitly healthy, creating reassurance among consumers. Campaigns like "More Doctors Smoke Camels" skillfully used medical authority to foster trust and credibility (Lucky Strike, 1930). These innovations skillfully enticed consumers to invest a premium, trading on the compelling promise of reduced health risks.
This strategy finds echoes in modern cannabis marketing. For example, as analyzed by Kyle Asquith (2021), cannabis brands like Liiv have adopted lab-like imagery to associate their products with scientific rigor and safety. A notable example is a 2019 Liiv post featuring a sterile, white hallway with personnel in protective gear, accompanied by the tagline, "Science is on our side." This use of scientific authority reveals the cigarette industry's approach, creating an aura of legitimacy to normalize and mainstream products.
This phenomenon is not confined to cigarettes and cannabis but is also pervasive in food advertising. Candy brands market their products as "healthy" by adding nutrients like vitamin C or fiber, or by highlighting simple, organic ingredients (Boesch, 2024). However, the high sugar content of these products often leads to health issues such as tooth decay and obesity, undermining any potential benefits. Such misleading strategies create a false perception of sugary treats as beneficial, masking the long-term health risks they pose.
Similarly, after facing a class-action lawsuit, Nutella could no longer explicitly market its product as healthy. Instead, its advertising shifted to leveraging authoritative breakfast imagery. Current campaigns deliberately feature breakfast's normative imagery, positioning mothers as a trusted "experts" who present Nutella as a favorite among children. Accompanied by authoritative voiceovers, contemporary advertisements craft a carefully constructed narrative where Nutella is seamlessly integrated into a seemingly nutritious morning ritual. By strategically situating the spread alongside fresh fruits, milk, and other wholesome ingredients, the brand creates a visual language that whispers nutritional value without uttering a direct claim. Textual and visual storytelling further reinforces this strategy, suggesting that such a breakfast is essential for a healthy, happy routine, attempting to embed Nutella into a daily lifestyle.
These advertisements assume their audiences are heterosexual women, they suggest that purchasing Nutella can help them secure the admiration of their husbands and children, thereby fostering familial happiness. By positioning Nutella as a nut-rich, family-friendly option, the company sell more than a food product, they promote the values it represents, such as familial love and harmony. In doing so, they subtly uphold the illusion of health while steering clear of overtly misleading claims.
Report abuse