 |
|
|
|||||
One of the best things about the Christmas period is all the yummy desserts found in peoples kitchens. But now one of the largest food companies in America is issuing a warning about one of those sweet treats. Heres what you need to know about a new recall from Danone U.S., which impacts one of its dairy-free frozen desserts. Whats happened? On December 15, North American food producer Danone U.S. announced a voluntary recall of one of its dessert products, per a notice posted on the website of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The company is recalling its So Delicious Dairy Free brand of Salted Caramel Cluster Non-Dairy Frozen Dessert. The recall is due to concerns that the product may contain foreign materials mixed into the dessert. Specifically, there is a chance that the cashews in the frozen dessert may have small stones and other hard objects embedded within them. The potential for foreign material contamination is obviously concerning, which is why Danone U.S. is pulling the impacted products from the shelves and urging consumers who have them not to eat them. What products are included in the recall? Only one product is listed as being part of this recall, though the product has multiple best-by dates: Product Name: So Delicious Dairy Free Salted Caramel Cluster Non-Dairy Frozen Dessert pints SKU: 136603 UPC: 744473476138 Best-By Dates / Lot No (Exp Dates): Before 08 Aug 2027 The recalled product, as the notice on the FDA website states, can have multiple Best-By Dates / Lot No (Exp Dates), all of which are before August 8, 2027. Danone U.S. has also posted photographs of the recall product, which you can view here. It should be noted that the recalled product actually came in two different packaging designs. Products purchased before February 7, 2025, have a different package design than those purchased after. Has anyone been harmed by the recalled product? The recall notice does not state whether anyone has been harmed by the presence of foreign materials in the frozen dessert. Danone U.S. says, So Delicious Dairy Free is working swiftly with retail partners to remove the potentially impacted product from shelves. In the meantime, the company has already identified and corrected this issue and will soon be able to bring back the frozen dessert so many people enjoy. Where was the recalled product sold? The notice does not specify where the product was sold. Fast Company has reached out to Danone U.S. for additional details. What should I do if I have the recalled product? You should not consume the recalled product if you have it in your possession. Instead, the recall notice posted on the So Delicious website states that you should dispose of the product. For information about a refund for the product, consumers are asked to contact So Delicious via the contact form on its website. Alternatively, consumers can call the company on the So Delicious Dairy Free Care Line at 1-833-367-8975.
Category:
E-Commerce
Last week, two fonts became the unlikely stars of a political messaging firestorm, after the Trump administration replaced Calibri as its official diplomatic font in favor of Times New Roman, claiming that an initial shift to Calibri in 2023 was part of former President Bidens DEIA agenda. The implication was clear: Calibri was framed as a liberal, Democratic font; while Times New Roman took its place as the Trump administrations more conservative choice. Now, a new study is revealing the major flaw in this logic: font is certainly a political tool, but its not inherently partisan. The study, titled Youre Just Not My Type: How Attitudes Towards Fonts Explain Affective Polarization, examines how affective polarizationor the tendency to associate positive feelings with ones political ingroup, and negative feelings with outgroupsimpacts peoples reception of different fonts. The study showed that, across multiple kinds of fonts, respondents were more likely to respond favorably to a font if they were told that it was associated with their own partisan and ideological beliefs. As the studys conclusion explains, “People will ‘like’ or ‘dislike’ the typeface in a political logo based on their political views of the candidate it represents. According to the researchers behind the study, Katherine Haenschen, Shannon Zenner, and Jessica R. Collier, this finding demonstrates that campaign designers shouldnt feel constrained to only using certain kinds of fonts in their workbecause, at the end of the day, constituents vote for candidates, not fonts. Emotion leads to analytical inconsistency This new study adds another layer of nuance to several years worth of research on how fonts are perceived in a political context. In 2019, an initial study coauthored by Haenschen found that individuals do make some instinctive ideological distinctions between typefaces. Serifs, like Times New Roman or Garamond, were rated by study participants as more conservative; while sans serifs such as Helvetica or Arial were rated as more liberal. But that perception isn’t the same as reality. Based on 2020 data from the Center for American Politics and Design, both Democrats and Republicans are more likely to use sans serif fonts, with 68% of Democratic candidates and 62% of Republican candidates using sans serifs that year, respectively. Haenschen, Zenner, and Colliers research offers more context on why that might be the case. Across three survey experiments, the researchers tested the relationship between political identity and emotional reactions to typefaces. They found that, when it comes to fonts in politics, emotions matter more than stylistic preference. In one condition, participants were shown a font along with a brief description framing it as ideologically associatedlike, for example, Time magazine rates Garamond as the most conservative font. In another, participants were shown a typeface with a partisan description (which refers to party affiliation), like, Time magazine rates Century Gothic as the most Democratic font. They were then asked to rate how much they liked the font. In both the ideological and partisan cases, respondents’ favorability ratings were noticeably impacted by their own political views. And the more partisan a respondent was, the more these descriptors impacted their choices. If you tell me, This font is liked by conservatives, and I’m a conservative, then that makes me like it even more, Zenner says. If you tell me that liberals like this typeface, and I’m not a liberal, then I tend to dislike that typefaceor it will affect how much I like it. While some respondents resisted these impacts, she says, most peoples political affiliation dominated their responses more than their actual taste. We saw that the political grouping you have can really overrun any kind of taste. But it’s good news for designers, actually For campaign designers, these results may actually be good news. Zenner says designers shouldnt worry about constraining their font choices based on ideological associations, because, ultimately, voters will associate their positive (or negative) feelings about a candidate with the font itself. Designers need to keep in mind that they still have the ability to make choices about typefaces, Zenner says. They shouldnt say, I can only pick a sans serif typeface if we have a liberal candidate, or I can only pick a serif if we have a conservative candidate, because, no matter what, the partisanship of the people who are voting swamps all these taste-level things. For some candidates, she adds, this research also opens the door to convey a more nuanced platform through design. For example, a Republican candidate campaigning in a swing state might opt for a sans serif font more traditionally perceived liberal to communicate a more forward-thinking, modern, or progressive stance, without actually alienating their voters. Affective polarization can also help explain how a font can so easily become a political flashpoint, as in the case of the Trump administrations nixing of Calibri in favor of Times New Roman. As soon as these typefaces became a topic of political discussion, Zenner says, the way people responded to them became inherently tied to their own political affiliations. Its no longer about how the font looks, or works, or whether anyone actually likes itits all about how its been politically labeled. People will be like, I only want stuff that looks like Times New Roman because I associate with MAGA and Trump, and therefore I’m going to back that up, Zenner says. Or the opposite will be like, Im definitely going to use Calibri in everything and I am going to make a statement by doing that, and I don’t know if I even care for it or if I like it or notit’ll just be the politics of it. I think it’s an example of where, yes, these differences in taste exist, but they’re very much driven by culture.
Category:
E-Commerce
Chipotle is officially in its Ozempic era. Today, the brand is launching an all-new High Protein Menu in the U.S. and Canada, which it describes as a clean menu for the protein movement. The menu comes with six items, including proteinmaxxed burritos and bowls and a new salad option. The real stand-out, though, is what Chipotle is billing as its “first-ever snack,” but is really just a tiny cup of chicken. The High Protein Cup is a topping-less, four-ounce serving of adobo-seasoned chicken that you could easily hold in the palm of your handand it’s a perfect, if somewhat depressing, symbol of the GLP-1 age. For Chipotle, the new menu means embracing two emerging trends in the food and beverage space: bringing off-menu, TikTok-inspired hacks into its official product offerings, and offering more nutritionally optimized (and visually unappealing) options as GLP-1 weight loss drugs begin to transform American consumers eating habits. [Photos: Chipotle] Menu hacks go mainstream Over the past few months, popular chains have increasingly been turning to platforms like TikTok and Instagram Reels to see exactly how their fans are engaging with menusand bringing those popular online hacks into the real world. Starbucks ignited the trend in July by launching a secret menu in its app that built off of the digital-driven consumer behavior of drink customization. That same month, Taco Bell tried something similar by rolling out a feature called Fan Style, which let users build their own menu items and share them on socials. In a press release, Chipotle explicitly cited a viral TikTok of a fan ordering a side of chicken for an extra protein boost as one of the inspirations behind its new High Protein Menu. “On social media, guests have been ‘hacking’ their orders by getting a side of protein as a standalone snack,” says Chris Brandt, Chipotle’s chief brand officer. “Were formalizing that behavior.” @maditev #chipotlehacks #chipotle its just so satisfying original sound – Madi Teeuws Chipotle’s Ozempic era Chipotle’s new menu appears to be targeting two different prospective customers: Those who are embracing the broader high protein trend, and those who are seeking low calorie, nutrient-dense options out of necessity driven by GLP-1s. The difference between these two categories is stark. Protein in its own right is currently having a moment across the fitness and nutrition worlds, and that’s snowballed into the macronutrient finding its way into everything from Cheerios to Starbucks drinks and Propel electrolytes. New protein-focused items on Chipotle’s menu include a double high protein bowl and burrito, both filled with chicken, beans, and other toppings, and both clocking in at around 80g of protein for 800 calories. But what really stands out about the Chipotle High Protein Menu are its options geared toward customers on GLP-1sa group that would otherwise be left behind by Chipotle’s traditional, high-calorie burritos. These include a High Protein-High Fiber Bowl and High Protein-Low Calorie salad, both explicitly labeled “GLP-1 friendly”; an Adobo Chicken Taco (which is a singular taco with 190 calories); and the aforementioned four-ounce chicken cup. “We designed GLP-1-friendly builds to generally align with widely shared guidance: approximately 300 to 550 calories, 20 to 40 grams of protein, and 6 to 12 grams of fiber,” says Brandt. “Our goal is to make it simple to find options that fit those ranges.” The logic behind the tiny chicken cup is clear: GLP-1 users need small, low-calorie, protein packed portions, because their brain’s hunger signals have been altered to feel fuller faster. But the unfortunate side effect of this effort is that, compared to Chipotle’s iconic chunky burritos and overstuffed bowls, its Ozempic-optimized chicken snack looks more like plain, sad fuel to be dutifully digested than a meal to look forward to. Chipotle is hardly the first brand to rethink its menus for the GLP-1 era, and it wont be the last. The brands embrace of new menu items geared toward smaller appetites signals that, as weight loss medications continue to fly off pharmacy shelves, GLP-1-centric menus may become the norm for other fast casual spots. We just hope they’ll add a few toppings to their offerings.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||