When I buy a new car, the car is the same as the one in the posters and built by the same people.
A team of food stylists spent at least 30 minutes to create the perfect whopper for the add image and were paid 100 times more than an actual fast food employee to do so.
Why that is allowed to represent something made in 30 seconds by someone on shit wages is beyond me.
Not to mention that the food stylists create something that isn't even edible. They frequently use things that aren't food to make it look more palatable onscreen.
I used to work in product photography. That is not true or legal here in Aus. The only thing they are allowed to use in the picture are ingredients used in store.
I cannot speak to the laws in other markets but that is not the case everywhere.
Of course they will go through hundreds of buns to find the perfect one etc, so it is still incredibly wasteful.
Advertising is scum and I don't understand why we allow it all.
It does not help the economy to distract consumers all day as much as possible, all it does is let companies compete on the basis of who can spend the most on advertising or who can hire the most manipulative advertisers rather than who can make the best product.
That's why a big lawsuit is a better solution. They've already stolen the search cost from you, and are relying on you just giving up when you see your disappointment burger.
Fun fact, most car advertising uses a computer generated car. Photoreal cars bave been achievable for years now and it just makes sense for them to do it as they can keep it looking flawless throughout the ad. There's even a "mocap" car with an adjustable body to match the length/width etc. of the car it's supposed to be that they can just pin the model to.
The lawsuit accuses the fast food giant of misleading customers by showing the burger with a meatier patty and ingredients that "overflow over the bun".
The class action lawsuit against Burger King alleged that the Whopper was made to look 35% larger, with more than double the amount of meat compared to what was actually served to customers.
Lawyer Anthony Russo, who represents the plaintiffs, did not immediately respond to a BBC request for comment.
Earlier this year, Taco Bell was sued in the US for selling pizzas and wraps that allegedly contained half the filling that was advertised.
Last year, a man in New York proposed a class-action lawsuit against McDonald's and Wendy's, in which he accused the two companies of unfair and deceptive trade practices.
The lawsuit alleged that McDonald's and Wendy's burgers in marketing materials were at least 15% larger than they were in real life.
The original article contains 328 words, the summary contains 149 words. Saved 55%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
I want a burger that doesn't taste like kerosene, with vegetables that were grown in the last decade, served by someone who isn't contemplating stabbing me.
I'd like to know what I'll get before I order. If the advertisement shows the burger with some size, I expect the same size when I order. Why should I get a smaller burger than the advertisement shows?
It was decades ago but Burger King was a bit of a staple for me for a few years when I lived close to a franchise operator that was consistent. It has been awhile and I knew things had gone downhill and some of the franchise operators are very shitty but I was shocked last time we went. The restaurant was filthy and the tables and floors were covered in food. The burgers looked to be thrown together out of bin leftovers. Can't say I blame staff for the lack of enthusiasm given their employer has a known history of wage theft. We couldn't tell the differences between the more expensive special and regular whopper so took the mess to the counter to ask what the fuck we were given and why it looked nothing like the photo. The whole family swore off them for life. Never going back.