An Interesting Example of Markets, Information, Responsibility

[mosdef]

While riding the subway home the other day I saw an ad that I think indicates a fairly interesting perspective on consumers. The advertisement read something like:

"Contains polyphenols. That's a good thing."

In order for this to type of advertising to work, the creators of the ad must believe that:

- Consumers will buy something if they think it's healthy.
- They need to be told what healthy and what's not.

I wonder if this is actually true? I suspect it might be - if you took 100 random people and asked them if they thought polypheols were healthy or not healthy I am sure you would get mostly "I don't know"s and a handful of people insisting that they cause cancer and a handful insisting that they stop cancer.

It also makes me wonder what goes through someone's head when they see an ad like that. Do they pick that product the next time they're selecting a beverage because of some vague notion that it's somehow "healthier"? Do they try to figure out what polyphenols are and whether or not they want them?

Also, I find the implicit message in the advertisement disturbing. On the one hand, we have consumers clamoring for protection from "bad" food (see transfat bans) and on the other hand we have suppliers surfacing to fill a need that (apparently) consumers have to be told what's healthy and what's not. Could we possibly have less responsible consumers? Do we really need to be protected by law from bad good and told by other what is good food? Is there anybody out there capable of making evaluations and decisions?