In recent years, the food industry has increased its use of labels. Whether the labels say ’non-GMO (非转基因的)’ or ’no sugar,’ or ’

admin2022-03-24  31

问题     In recent years, the food industry has increased its use of labels. Whether the labels say ’non-GMO (非转基因的)’ or ’no sugar,’ or ’zero carbohydrates’, consumers are increasingly demanding more information about what’s in their food. One report found that 39 percent of consumers would switch from the brands they currently buy to others that provide clearer, more accurate product information. Food manufacturers are responding to the report with new labels to meet that demand, and they’re doing so with an eye towards giving their products an advantage over the competition, and bolstering profits.
    This strategy makes intuitive sense. If consumers say they want transparency, tell them exactly what is in your product. That is simply supplying a certain demand. But the marketing strategy in response to this consumer demand has gone beyond articulating what is in a product, to labeling what is NOT in the food. These labels are known as "absence claims" labels, and they represent an emerging labeling trend that is detrimental both to the consumers who purchase the products and the industry that supplies them.
    For example, Hunt’s put a "non-GMO" label on its canned crushed tomatoes a few years ago—despite the fact that at the time there was no such thing as a GMO tomato on the market. Some dairy companies are using the "non-GMO" label on their milk, despite the fact that all milk is naturally GMO-free, another label that creates unnecessary fear around food.
    While creating labels that play on consumer fears and misconceptions about their food may give a company a temporary marketing advantage over competing products on the grocery aisle, in the long term this strategy will have just the opposite effect: by injecting fear into the discourse about our food, we run the risk of eroding consumer trust in not just a single product, but the entire food business.
    Eventually, it becomes a question in consumers’ minds: Were these foods ever safe? By purchasing and consuming these types of products, have I already done some kind of harm to my family or the planet? For food manufacturers, it will mean damaged consumer trust and lower sales for everyone. And this isn’t just supposition. A recent study found that absence claims labels can create a stigma around foods even when there is no scientific evidence that they cause harm.
    It’s clear that food manufacturers must tread carefully when it comes to using absence claims. In addition to the likely negative long-term impact on sales, this verbal trick sends a message that innovations in farming and food processing are unwelcome, eventually leading to less efficiency, fewer choices for consumers, and ultimately, more costly food products. If we allow this kind of labeling to continue, we will all lose.
What does the author say is manufacturers’ new marketing strategy?

选项 A、Stressing the absence of certain elements in their products.
B、Articulating the unique nutritional value of their products.
C、Supplying detailed information of their products.
D、Designing transparent labels for their products.

答案A

解析 根据题干中的信息词manufacturers ‘new marketing strategy,答案线索可以定位到第二段。第二段第五句提到“这些标签被称为‘不含某种成分声明’标签,它们代表了一种新兴的贴标签趋势”,这里提到的趋势就是题干说的“制造商的新营销策略”,那这一策略是什么呢?我们需要去前文寻找答案。该段第四句提到“针对这种消费者需求的营销策略不仅阐明了产品中包含什么成分,而且还标明食品中不包含什么成分”,这与选项A的表述一致,故为正确答案。选项B提到的“营养价值”在文中没有提到,故排除。选项C提到的“提供详细信息”不是制造商的新营销策略,故排除。选项D是根据第二段第一句中的单词transparency设置的干扰项,原文是说消费者想要透明的信息,而不是制造商设计透明标签,故排除。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/f8x7777K
0

随机试题
最新回复(0)