CHICAGO — A panel of five consumers who identified as being curious and somewhat knowledgeable about food was recruited to be interviewed live and on stage at The Center for Food Integrity Transparency Summit held in Chicago Oct. 22-24. The consensus among the panelists was they want more information about the ingredients in the foods they purchase.
Several panelists said they will Google ingredients they perceive as questionable when in the supermarket but would prefer a QR code to learn more about the ingredients.
“I keep scrolling until I get the answer I want,” said one panelist, who also does not typically go to a manufacturer’s website unless there’s a QR code that takes him there.
He said he looks for certain ingredients and will reject a product if it contains one of them. For example, he prefers sugar to corn syrup and avocado oil to any seed oil.
The panelists agreed they trust retailers, such as Whole Foods Market, Costco, Aldi and Trader Joe’s, which the panelists believe vet products before they make it into the store. There also is a higher level of trust in private labels and local brands among the group.
Panelists said too many certifications on a label causes confusion, and sometimes results in them putting the product back because they think the claim may be deceiving. The certifications also make them question what the rest of the industry is doing that does not have these certifications.
“Stop making up terms to make us feel better about what we are buying,” a panelist said. “Get back to the basics and tell us the facts, not opinion.”
They all said they want more clarity about “manufactured on,” “sell by” and “use by” dates. If the date is too far in the future, some believe the product must be full of preservatives, even when none are claimed on the ingredient statement.
Using canned foods as an example, one panelist did not trust a can of vegetables with a 12-month expiration date. She believed there was something more in the can than the beans, water and salt listed on the ingredient statement. An insight from the discussion was it may be useful to explain the technology used to achieve such a shelf life in marketing communication.
There also was a strong belief among the panelists that not all ingredients are declared on labels. The panelists repeatedly said they want to know what is in their food and they currently believe the industry is not being transparent enough. They used the phrases “clean label,” “minimally processed” and “simple ingredients.”
None of them had heard the term “ultra-processed.”
From a marketing perspective, the panelists said they want to hear about products from people and that may explain why influencers have become part of so many marketing efforts.
A consumer survey of approximately 1,500 conducted this past summer by FMI-The Food Industry Association aligned with the panelists’ opinions. The top definition of transparency, as selected by 89% of interviewees, was “a complete list of ingredients,” said Steve Markenson, vice president-research and insights at FMI. With the ability to select more than one definition, “complete list” was closely followed by “a plain English description of ingredients” (86%) and “in-depth nutritional information” (85%).
In addition, FMI found that 79% of consumers are likely to seek more information by scanning a QR code and 54% are interested in more information beyond what is on a product label.
The importance of transparency continues to grow, said Markenson. The numbers tell the story, with 69% of shoppers citing its importance in 2018. That number jumped to 74% this year.
When it comes to brand loyalty, Markenson said 80% of those interviewed said they were more loyal to a brand that provides in-depth product information.
“And 73% said that they’re willing to switch brands to another that provides more in-depth info,” he said.