Mark Ritson comes into 2026 weapons blazing along with his views on the sheer ludicrousness of name naming conventions. His recommendation? Lean into the insanity… if you happen to suppose you’ll get away with it.
4 Individuals walked into federal court docket final week to declare, with obvious sincerity, that that they had every been deceived by a McDonald’s McRib sandwich.
Their grievance alleges that the McRib “doesn’t comprise any precise pork rib meat in any respect” and that the distinctive rack-shaped patty is as a substitute constructed from floor pork shoulder, coronary heart, tripe and, one of the best bit, scalded abdomen.
Fries with that?
The plaintiffs argue that by together with the phrase “Rib” within the identify, McDonald’s engages in “a deliberate sleight of hand” that misleads cheap customers into anticipating rib meat, which instructions a premium worth. McDonald’s has responded by calling the lawsuit a distortion and noting that its web site has all the time described the product as “seasoned boneless pork.”
The case is pending, however this type of brand-name bullshittery is as previous as advertising itself. McDonald’s isn’t the one model that would come beneath scrutiny.
Not solely is the McRib not constructed from pork ribs. Quaker Oats has by no means had any hyperlink to Quakers. Dr Pepper wasn’t invented by a physician. Our advertising ancestors received away with all this bullshit on a regular basis, however then the web arrived, and issues received extra tasty.
Like when Australian teenager Matt Corby bought a Subway Footlong sandwich in 2013, solely to find he was an inch wanting its titular promise. His ancestors would have simply sworn a bit and moved on. However he uploaded the photographic proof to Fb with a throwaway put up.
And it went viral.
Dozens of different prospects began posting footage of their very own stunted Subway purchases. That instantly sparked the venal curiosity of America’s class-action legal professionals, who will primarily sue anybody, at any time, over something, if there may be even a tiny probability of a payout. They could sue me for that final sentence. [Editor’s note: Sue us, thanks Mark].
Inside every week of Corby’s innocuous three-word put up, 9 separate fits had been filed in American courts, all geared toward US client safety legal guidelines that prohibit misleading enterprise practices.
Slicing a protracted story very quick, the instances floundered on a single shock revelation: nearly all of Subway’s Footlong sandwiches have been certainly a foot lengthy. The vagaries of baking and packing did end in an occasional lack of inches, however solely in very uncommon circumstances.
We’ve all been there. Proper?
Even then, the preliminary quantity of bread baked was all the time the identical and the instances have been thrown out. In a uncommon second of selling authenticity, Subway’s Footlong was, principally, a foot lengthy.
Issues have been much more opaque with Vitamin Water, Coca-Cola’s masterstroke of brand-name bullshittery. Client advocacy teams sued in 2009, alleging that the product’s identify, mixed with well being claims about lowering eye illness and boosting immune perform, misled customers into believing they have been buying one thing wholesome moderately than, because the plaintiffs memorably characterised it, “simply one other flavored, sugary snack meals like Coca-Cola, besides that defendants selected to not carbonate it”.
Ouch.
Need to go deeper? Ask The Drum
Coca-Cola’s authorized protection included the genuinely astonishing argument that no cheap client could possibly be misled into pondering Vitamin Water was wholesome. The decide was unimpressed, noting that anticipating customers to disregard the entrance of the bottle and hunt by the small-print dietary info posted on the again to find the product incorporates 32 grams of sugar was optimistic, at greatest.
The litigation dragged on for years till Coca-Cola agreed so as to add the phrases “with sweeteners” to labels and delete most of its well being claims. This was a win for Coca-Cola, which received to keep up its billion-dollar model, and a win for attorneys, who collected $2.73m for his or her efforts. The one losers have been customers, who have been left to as soon as once more assume they’re making a wholesome selection with Vitamin Water regardless of consuming sufficient sugar to energy a sequence of young children’s birthday events.
Essentially the most ironic instance of name identify bullshittery is the fascinating case of Poundland. Based in 1990 on its titular worth message, the corporate quickly fell foul of inflation, easy economics and the intrinsic requirement of any enterprise to show a revenue. It merely couldn’t hold promoting all the pieces for a pound. So it steadily stopped. At the moment, lower than a 3rd of its stock qualifies. The irony? The chain was in a lot bother final 12 months that it was bought to Gordon Brothers for the nominal sum of, you guessed it, a pound.
At the very least names like Poundland or Footlong are partially, tangentially acceptable. Many examples of name identify bullshittery are extra excessive and the contradiction between identify, declare and recreation way more fallacious. Kentucky Fried Rooster isn’t primarily based in Kentucky. White chocolate has no chocolate in it. Panama hats have all the time been made in Ecuador. And the cereal model Grape-Nuts incorporates no grapes.
Or nuts.
What’s it constructed from? No person is aware of.
However the grand exemplar of brand-name bullshittery, the largest, boldest turd of all of them, is unquestionably Häagen-Dazs. Its origin story is breathtakingly bogus.
Confronted with a worth battle within the US ice-cream market in 1959, Reuben Mattus, the founding father of Senator Frozen Merchandise, determined to go upmarket. Satisfied he wanted one thing that sounded unique and imported for his new model, he opted for a Danish identify.
In one of many nice moments of selling, and definitely brand-name bullshittery, Mattus sat on his sofa within the Bronx and, to make use of the proper technical terminology, made a bunch of shit up. He knew no Danes, had by no means been to Denmark, and it exhibits. Häagen-Dazs has an umlaut and a zs digraph on the finish regardless of neither being a function of the Danish language. To this present day, Danish folks don’t purchase Häagen-Dazs as a result of they actually don’t perceive what the fuck it’s.
Flagrant, ridiculous, flamboyant bullshittery. And but it labored so properly that Häagen-Dazs continues not solely to be commercially profitable, however one of many nice manufacturers of recent advertising. Sensible positioning. Improbable execution. Buckets of name fairness. Premium pricing.
Possibly that’s the final word lesson of brand-name bullshittery. Entrepreneurs give attention to advantages, not options. And maybe that additionally applies, in extremis, to naming. You possibly can select a extra truthful, legitimate model identify: the Eleven-Incher, Much less Than 5 Pound Land, a McTripe sandwich. However the place is the enjoyable, or fame, or profit in any of that?
Higher to go broad and lengthy and enjoy ambiguity and outright deception. Ignore the constraints of accuracy. Model identify bullshittery beats authenticity and accuracy, by no less than an inch, each time.
Mark Ritson is a former advertising professor, model marketing consultant and award-winning columnist. He’s additionally the founding father of the MiniMBA, which is neither mini, it lasts for twelve weeks, nor an MBA, it simply focuses on the advertising half. But it surely’s superb and kicks off once more in April: www.minimba.com
Watch Mark Ritson share his 10 global marketing moments of 2025
Source link
