Summary
Anna Tollison has filed a class action lawsuit against Subway, claiming its Steak & Cheese sandwich is falsely advertised to appear as if it contains 200% more meat than it actually does.
Tollison alleges that Subway’s misleading advertising causes consumers to overpay, which is concerning due to inflation.
Her lawyer said that while such cases often face dismissal, if this one proceeds, it could lead to compensation and class certification, allowing affected customers to seek refunds for the alleged misrepresentation.
Not defending Subway, but food advertisement / photography uses all sorts of dirty tricks to make it look more appealing. What’s photographed may not even be edible.
It’s possible the amount of meat is the same in the photo but just shoved and piled up on the side to look like more.
Example: https://shotkit.com/food-photography-secrets-revealed/
That said, advertisements should be forced to accurately represent what you’ll be served and not an idealized version of it.
In most other countries outside the US they are forced to be honest. It’s still an idealised version, but you wouldn’t be able to get away with showing double meat in Europe.
When I was a kid, HBO did a special for kids about deceptive advertising practices- imagine that today. They did a whole segment on food photography and showed people doing things like making ice cream out of vegetable shortening and food coloring. The whole thing fascinated me.
Edit: Found it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LaVM2XG4wvE Apparently it was originally a Consumer Reports thing and this is the VHS version. But I saw it on HBO and HBO made a big deal out of it at the time.
Damn… it’s amazing how well I remember this despite not having seen it since probably 1990.
We had a curriculum in school identifying different types of propaganda in advertising. They had us bring in ads from magazines and sort through how they were trying to sell us things. Likewise, I can’t imagine that still being taught today. Seems like it would be one of the first casualties of the modern American way of defunding education.
We learned things a long those lines a couple times when I was in highschool not that long ago, but I also went to a weird highschool so I’m not sure how much that generalizes
Whats a magazine?
It’s like a disposable book, with ads.
So they used to just throw Kindles in the trash?!
If I recall, the rule in the US is that the primary food being advertised must be real food, so cereal might have glue instead of milk, because you’re not selling the milk. But you can prop it up and cherry-pick as much as you like.
You could style the meat in your sub to look like the ad… but you’d probably find that you have to stack it all up at the edge.
Even with that reasoning, at some point you’ve gone way too far into fraud. This may be it: it doesn’t look possible to make the actual meat look anything like the marketing photo.
This is just one of the reasons we need deregulation. It’s a huge nuisance that we are not allowed to make false advertising. /s
Think of all the innovative swindling we could do in an unregulated market! Think of the profits!!!
Think of how delicious a deceptively-advertised Trump steak will look!
Talk about false advertising. Tried to order contact lenses on Lens dot com the other day for someone. Advertised price with rebate seemed reasonable. Create account, (as they require that to proceed) go on about choosing options and filling in info.
Only at the last order page, do they tack on $250 of “taxes and fees” (even though it’s a medical device so it’s not taxed) and then try to explain away in an info widget that taxes are “stuff we may be charged but we’re just making up this bullshit number.” Oh, and they charge shipping.
1800contacts did not do either of these things. LensDirect seemed equally non-bullshit but their prices were a bit higher.
How many people get scammed by the “taxes and fees” field figuring, “welp, I guess that’s just the price of America.”?
Edit: de-hyperlinking the lens site, they don’t deserve any clicks, only hate.
Here in EU it’s illegal to advertise to consumers without taxes. Regulation is cool when t protects consumers and the environment and it stimulate real competition, instead of the more sophisticated liar.
I grief every time I hear some stupid Republican American call for more deregulation. Deregulation was also what made the banks fail.
But somehow there is little response in USA against the minimal state you can drown in a bathtub?!
Although it’s obviously worse to empower the mega corps and the mega rich, over a lawful state regulation against abusing power.Edit: de-hyperlinking the lens site, they don’t deserve any clicks, only hate.
Good call. 😀
Oh man, seriously, regulations are the only thing keeping people safe or it would be junk fees all the way down. Take wireless phone service in the US right now, the main carriers say you have a rate plan of x, but then they tack on all the taxes and fees they have to pay and pass them onto you, saying they’re taxes you have to pay. The price also then varies depending on where you live, in some places the “taxes and fees” can add $15-20/month to a single phone line. Nowhere near the advertised price.
Now, once or twice a year, they also add on new made up “fees” whenever their quarters aren’t looking as profitable as they expect, so you’ll see another $5/month or $7/month charge tacked on.
Then they don’t let you pay your bill with a credit card if you want an “autopay discount” - a discount that used to exist for carriers to encourage people to stop using paper billing.
More and more people are switching to paper billing and mailing in checks just to make those companies have to waste more money/resources for being so dickish.
If they were regulated, they’d be forced to just have a flat price, you could pay with any money, and they’d still be profitable, and the bill would be less confusing.
I worked at a subway, and everytime we put new menu the images get more and more astranged from reality
Coincidentally got subway yesterday for the first time in years. Immediately noticed that the bread is less than half the width of what it used to be.
Don’t those photos always have a small print disclaimer on them that says the actual product may not look like that or something along those lines? Is that enough to protect them in a lawsuit?
serving suggestion. Picture contains ingredients from 8 actual sandwiches
Glad the subway by me went out of business
Ridiculous! It’s more like 400% more.
Why can’t Subway just give this woman the meat she paid for?
She should have went to Arby’s.
Arby’s | We Have The Meats
Even Arbys has shrunk things down. And don’t get me started on them removing potato cakes!!!
One could say this case has more substance than a subway sandwich.
