FOOD

Burger King plans nationwide rollout of Impossible Burger by the end of 2019

Content Courtesy of: foodnavigator-usa.com

Written by: Elaine Watson

Will plant-based meat go mainstream? It’s early days, but there were some positive signs this morning as Burger King confirmed that trials of the Impossible Burger in St Louis went so well that the chain aims to roll out the plant-based burger nationwide (7,000+ locations) by the year end.

A spokeswoman said: "The Impossible Whopper test in St. Louis went exceedingly well and as a result, there are plans to extend testing into additional markets in the very near future.

"Burger King Restaurants are targeting nationwide availability of the Impossible Whopper by the end of 2019. Burger King Restaurants in St Louis are showing encouraging results and Impossible Whopper sales are complementing traditional Whopper purchases."

The trial in Burger King which follows launches in Red Robin and White Castle for Impossible Foods and in Del Taco, A&W, and Carl's Jr for rival beyond Meat is a "major milestone for the plant-based meat industry," Zak Weston, foodservice analyst at the Good Food Institute (GFI) told FoodNavigator-USA.

This is just the beginning. Burger King has thrown down the gauntlet and we expect to see similar moves from other industry players. Burgers are just the start and we're likely to see plant-based chicken, fish and pork rolled out on menus and becoming increasingly popular.

"These chains clearly recognize the huge business opportunity here. Industrial animal farming is extraordinarily inefficient and as economies of scale kick in and supply ramps up, the price of plant-based alternatives will plummet to well below that of their animal-based competitors.

"Once this happens, the fact that even Burger King\u2019s taste testers can\u2019t tell a difference will dictate that the Impossible Whopper and other plant-based meats will become the norm. This change can't come soon enough."

ART

Notre Dame Cathedral fire: What caused it and what happens next

Content Courtesy of: cnet.com

Written by: Shelby Brown

Officials speculate that a possible electrical short-circuit is responsible for the fire, in tandem with the cathedral's lack of fire-prevention safeguards.

The world mourned with Paris as a fire tore through the Cathedral of Notre Dame on Monday.

French judicial police believe an electrical short-circuit is most likely what caused the devastating fire that blazed through Paris' historic Notre Dame Cathedral on Monday. According to the anonymous official who spoke with the Associated Press on Thursday, investigators still aren't allowed inside the cathedral for safety reasons.

Authorities are still investigating the fire as an accident but are taking the cathedral's outdated fire-prevention safeguards into consideration, The New York Times reported.

Elements like firewalls and sprinkler systems were reportedly missing from Notre Dame's attic, where the fire burned, by choice. Electrical wiring reportedly wasn't allowed in the cathedral's attic to preserve its original design and to protect the lead ceiling's timber support beams.

Valérie Pécresse, the president of the Île-de-France region in which Paris lies, confirmed Tuesday that the fire was an accident, though officials haven't elaborated on the exact cause. Paris police said it may be linked to the $6.8 million renovation efforts underway.

In the aftermath of the fire, French President Emmanuel Macron vowed to rebuild the landmark. Experts now plan to fortify what's left of the 850-year-old structure, and donations have already started coming in from French philanthropists and charities to fund the extensive rebuilding costs.

It took nine hours and more than 400 firefighters to bring the blaze under control and eventually put it out altogether in the early hours of Tuesday. No deaths were reported, but one firefighter was reportedly seriously injured.

Though fire crews initially said they "may not be able to save Notre Dame," they were able to preserve the main structure including the outer walls and the two bell towers. Photos from inside the cathedral taken Tuesday morning showed debris still smoldering around the altar. On Tuesday, a tweet surfaced showing that the rooster from the iconic spire survived the fire.

Additionally, three beehives -- home to about 180,000 bees -- located beneath the rose window also survived the fire. Notre Dame's beekeeper, Nicolas Geant, said he received a call from the cathedral's spokesperson who said the bees were flying in and out of their hives. Geant posted photos of bees buzzing around one of the gargoyles last week.

People in France and around the world were in mourning over the damage, including the loss of the building's spire and part of the roof. Artifacts and artwork in the cathedral were saved by Parisian fire services and the city's deputy mayor for tourism and sports, Jean-Francois Martins, and his team. They were able to salvage the Crown of Thorns, the Blessed Sacrament and other items. The rescued works were transported to the Louvre Museum for safekeeping.

"We made a human chain, with our friends from the church ... to get, as quick as possible, to get all the relics," Martins told CBS News. "Everything is safe and undamaged, and in our really bad day, we had one good news."

'Everything is burning'

The fire started shortly after the cathedral closed around 6:45 p.m. local time and grew quickly in windy conditions. The narrow streets, the heat of the flames and the Parisian landmark's positioning along the River Seine made it difficult for firefighters to get closer.

At around 7:53 p.m., the spire fell amid the flames. Less than 15 minutes later, part of the roof collapsed, Reuters reported. The island where the cathedral is located, Paris' Ile de la Cité, was evacuated just before 8:30 p.m.

"Everything is burning; nothing will remain from the frame," Notre Dame spokesperson Andre Finot told CBS News shortly after the blaze began.

Though President Donald Trump tweeted that "perhaps flying water tankers could be used to put it out," the civil defense agency of the French government responded that firefighters are using all means to combat the blaze, "except for water-bombing aircrafts which, if used, could lead to the collapse of the entire structure of the cathedral."

A city united

Images of the fire quickly swept the globe on social media. And in Paris, France 24 reported, people gathered and to sing Ave Maria and Catholic hymns.

"Our Lady of Paris in flames. Emotion of a whole nation. Thought for all Catholics and for all French. Like all our countrymen, I'm sad tonight to see this part of us burn," Macron tweeted. France 24 reported that Macron is treating the fire as a national emergency.

In a tweet, Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgo said firefighters were working to control the flames from the "terrible" fire and she urged residents and visitors to respect the security perimeter.

Much like after the terrorist attacks on Paris in 2015, politicians, religious leaders and ordinary citizens from around also tweeted statements of support.

Social media also delved into one of its favorite pastimes — conspiracy theories — after a US politician tweeted out unverified information after a friend in Europe told him the fire had been set intentionally.

Christopher Hale, who ran for Congress in Tennessee and writes opinion columns for Time magazine, quickly specified that his friend's information hadn't been confirmed and deleted his original tweet, according to The Daily Beast. But that didn't stop far-right conspiracy theorists from using Hale's tweet as proof that terrorists had started the fire.

"In retrospect, I absolutely never should have tweeted it in the first place," Hale told the publication on Tuesday. "I don't think I had the foresight about how much the worst parts of the internet will grasp for straws in their conspiracy theories."

French authorities haven't suggested arson as a cause for the blaze.

On Thursday, firefighters from the Paris Fire Brigade attended a reception in their honor at Macron's residence, the Élysée Palace. According to The New York Times, there's an additional ceremony scheduled for later in the day.

The race to save history

While the Gothic cathedral, which dates from the 12th century, is a masterpiece itself with its flying buttresses, breathtaking stained glass windows and carved gargoyles, inside its walls are priceless Catholic relics and artifacts, paintings, statues and other precious artwork. Fortunately, some of the treasures were safely retrieved as the fire unfolded, including a centuries-old crown of thorns made from reeds and gold. And just days ago, copper statues representing the 12 apostles and four evangelists were removed for cleaning as part of the restoration project.

The cathedral's facade has been the subject of countless paintings and its soaring form also inspired Victor Hugo's famous novel, Notre-Dame de Paris or The Hunchback of Notre Dame. Aside from being one of the most important religious sights in France, it's also a symbol of Paris and one of the city's most visited monuments.

How to see Notre Dame Cathedral

It's too soon to say when restoration on the cathedral will begin. For now, if you want to visit or relive a trip there, check out these virtual tours both inside the majestic halls and from a birds-eye view of the timeless architecture.

Not to Rush Notre-Dame Restoration

‘Let’s Take the Time to Diagnose’: In Open Letter, Experts Urge Emmanuel Macron Not to Rush Notre-Dame Restoration

Content Courtesy of: artnews.com

Written by: Alex Greenberger

Mandatory Credit Photo by: CHRISTOPHE PETIT TESSON/ Cathedral of Notre-Dame of Paris fire aftermath, France - 16 Apr 2019

The debris inside the Cathedrale de Notre-Dame following the fire.

After the fire that badly damaged Notre-Dame Cathedral, Emmanuel Macron, the president of France, pledged that the structure would be rebuilt by 2024—in time for the city to host the Olympics. The goal struck some as overly ambitious, and now the French newspaper Le Figaro has published a lengthy missive signed by 1,169 academics and curators urging the president not to speed through what could be a very difficult process.

“Let’s take the time to diagnose,” reads the letter, which was published on Sunday. “A number of [experts] can be found in your administration, in the Ministry of Culture. Let us remind you of their expertise, take the right path to find them, and then, yes, set an ambitious deadline for an exemplary restoration not only for the present but also for generations to come.”

Among the signatories are curators and academics from France and beyond. Numerous curators from the Louvre count among them, including Nicolas Milovanovic and Cécile Scailliérez, both chief curators in the museum’s painting department. Also included are officials from the Petit Palais, the Grand Palais, the Musée d’Orsay, and the Musee de Cluny.

American officials who signed the letter include Philippe de Montebello, the former director of the Metropolitan Museum of Art; Xavier F. Salomon, the chief curator of the Frick Collection; Barry Bergdoll, who formerly served as chief curator of the Museum of Modern Art’s design department; Davide Gasparotto, the senior curator of the painting department at the Getty Museum in Los Angeles; and Guillaume Kientz, a curator of European art at the Kimbell Art Museum in Fort Worth, Texas.

The rebuilding effort at Notre-Dame has been a subject under close watch within France and internationally. Shortly after the fire was contained, French collector François Pinault and his son François-Henri said they would put €100 million (about $113 million) toward the efforts. Hours later, collector Bernard Arnault announced that he would donate €200 million (about $226 million) to the project.

Some experts have cast doubt on how much a rebuilding project could salvage. Robert A. Maxwell, a professor at the Institute of Fine Arts in New York who signed the open letter, told ARTnews at the time of the fire that certain elements of Notre-Dame, such as pieces of 13th-century wood and stone, might be permanently damaged—“so all that we might one day have learned from them will also be irremediably lost.”

In the weeks since the fire, Macron has said he will hold an architecture contest for the rebuilding project.

The full open letter can be found in French behind a paywall on Le Figaro’s website, along with the list of signatories.

ADVERTISING

YUMI founders on fresh baby food, millennial moms and going viral: ‘Parents love to share recommendations…

Content Courtesy of: foodnavigator-usa.com

Written by: Elaine Watson

New parents are busy, demanding, and sleep-deprived (cranky). But if you make products that solve problems for them, they’re also far more likely than most consumers to tell other people about your brand, which is the kind of free marketing most start-ups would kill for, say the founders of direct to consumer baby and toddler food delivery brand YUMI.

We launched in late summer of 2017 and we’ve been blown away by how much of our growth has been through word of mouth,” YUMI co-founder and CEO Angela Sutherland told FoodNavigator-USA. “We’ve really benefited from people loving our product, becoming fans, and telling their friends.

“There is so much anxiety in that period; parents are always asking other parents and friends about what works for them

“Parents really do like to share recommendations, it’s one of the most viral markets; they are constantly swapping advice,”

​ added Sutherland, a former investment banker who teamed up with business journalist Evelyn Rusli to create YUMI after researching baby food options for her own baby and feeling distinctly underwhelmed.

I went to the store and was asking why would I feed my kids something I wouldn’t personally eat? If I ate shelf-stable applesauce all day long I’d be malnourished. A lot of my friends were making their own baby food, but not because they enjoyed it. Most of us don’t go home after a long day at work and sew pants; they were doing it because the market didn’t have what they wanted.

“Millennial parents are far more demanding: they want organic and fresh foods for their own diets and they want the same for their children, so we started working closely with pediatricians and nutritionists to look at nutrient density in every meal, to improve the fiber to sugar ratio, and ensure we had enough protein and healthy fat.”

‘There are a lot of lessons to be learned from the meal kit category’

But why build a direct to consumer business rather going into retail? Lots of reasons, said Sutherland, one being that prepared baby food lends itself better to the online subscription model than meal kits, as new parents are creatures of habit, no preparation is involved, and the products can be frozen if plans change.

“As a parent, once you find a diaper brand that works, you stick with it. The same applies to baby food, if you find something your baby likes and you’re happy with it, you don’t tend to keep switching.

But the key for Los Angeles-based YUMI – aside from having a differentiated product and appealing brand – has been building a relationship with parents and following them on their journey, so that YUMI becomes a trusted resource, she said.

There are a lot of lessons to be learned from the meal kit category. Unless you have a very deep relationship with your customer and you build that from the beginning, you’re at risk of being commoditized.

“So from day one we knew that beyond the product – which had to be differentiated - we also had to flesh out the content and experience."

‘Several customers have been on for more than 50 weeks’

She added: “We have nutrition coaches as part of our customer service department who can provide free advice. People ask us all kinds of questions beyond food that shows we are more than just a food company. We invested quite a bit in customer service off the bat because we wanted to make sure we could build those relationships and deliver on our promises from day one.

She added: “Several customers have been on for more than 50 weeks, which shows that this is something people are sticking with. We started with blends but snacks were the #1 thing our customers were asking us for, so introducing our Tot Box  [bites and puffs] was completing the picture for us. We also find that other members of the family are eating the products too.”

‘We felt there was a big information gap as well as a product gap’

Cofounder Evelyn Rusli added:<em> “We felt there was a big information gap as well as a product gap. Of course we wanted to create better products but we also wanted to support parents with information, so that’s why content is a big part of the YUMI experience, so we talk about how the nutrients we deliver correlate to the development of your child.”

Sutherland explained: “So we’ll say, your child is now crawling and it’s the first time your baby’s bones will support weight, so you should support this period of growth with calcium, to create strong and healthy bones. We’re helping parents to connect the dots, and as a direct to consumer business you have the unique ability to have a conversation with your customers over time.”

* Modified Atmosphere Packaging (MAP) displaces oxygen with inert gas to ensure food stays fresh for longer.

YUMI which has raised $4.1m to date from backers including August Capital and Brand Foundry Ventures, ships its fresh organic chilled baby food in modified atmosphere-packed* BPA-free recyclable plastic containers on a weekly basis to parents in the Los Angeles, San Francisco and New York areas in insulated packaging designed to keep it cool for up to 48 hours in transit.

The blends - which feature names such as papaya buckwheat bowl and kiwi chia pudding - include a wide range of fruits, legumes, greens, grains, root vegetables, spices, and healthy fats, and will stay fresh in the fridge for seven days (or two months in the freezer).

YUMI's average jar has a 3:1 sugar to fiber ratio, while the average squeeze pouch on the market has a 12:1 ratio, claimed Sutherland, who chose sorghum rather than rice for her new cauliflower puffs owing to its higher protein and fiber content.

“You can start for as low as $35 a week and it goes up from there based on how many meals you want.”

​All of the products are free of the top eight allergens, said Sutherland, who acknowledged that experts now advise of allergens such as eggs, peanuts and milk, but said she wants parents to be in control of this process.

“We provide materials to parents about the importance of delivering allergens to children early, but we want to give them control to do this and add in things like nut powders if they want to and when they want to.”

The decision to opt for plant-based products was also born out of a desire to give parents the option of adding meat or fish if they wish, she said: “Parents tell us that it’s easy for them to incorporate a little bit of meat.”

Interested in what we're feeding our babies and children? Or whether you are what your mother ate? Join us at the second in Chicago on November 18-20.

7 of the most controversial ads of our time

Content Courtesy of: thedrum.com

Written by: Emma Mulcahy

With so much competition for attention today, controversial ads are becoming more commonplace. Brands have to be bold to be heard – and sometimes they cross the line with outrageous work.

Some agencies have even gone so far to create work they know will get banned to garner maximum publicity with minimum marketing spend. Others have absolutely no idea the impact their work will have when it plays in the wider world.

While fortune can favor the brave, the ad industry is littered with examples of bold ads that have backfired.

Here The Drum looks at some of the most controversial ads of recent times and examines why they succeeded... or failed.

Pepsi: ‘Live for Now’ (2017)

Arguably the biggest advertising flop of recent times, Pepsi's 'Live For Now' ad was pulled by the soft drink retailer in less than 24 hours of its premiere. The two-and-a-half-minute-long video sees an ethnically diverse, color-coordinated crowd of young people staging a protest against… we don’t know what, before supermodel Kendall Jenner steps in with her can of Pepsi to stop police brutality and save the day. Cue jaws dropping the world over.

The ad sparked widespread derision, and there was genuine offence caused by Pepsi’s insensitive handling of the topic (the ad appears to emulate a Black Lives Matter protest and invites a direct comparison between Jenner and protester Iesha Evans, who was arrested for her protest).

The production was condemned by everyone from Madonna to the daughter of doctor Martin Luther King. Produced by Pepsi’s in-house marketing team, the brand issued an apology to both the public and to Jenner. Kendall, however, did not address the issue publicly until the season 14 premiere of ‘Keeping up with the Kardashians’, where the model broke down to cameras and expressed that she has never felt “so fucking stupid”.

To mark the 30th anniversary of Nike’s legendary marketing slogan, the sports giant chose to run a series of ads featuring athletes that had overcome huge personal and physical opposition in order to rise to the top of their profession. One such athlete was the NFL’s Colin Kaepernick, a former 49r who sparked national debate in 2016 by kneeling during the national anthem as a protest against the racial inequality that continues to pervade North America.

In a divisive creative decision, Nike chose to have Kaepernick star in and narrate its ad for ‘Just Do It’ and it certainly polarized the sportswear brand’s audience. While many applauded Nike for backing Kaepernick, who the brand has endorsed since 2011, others denounced the move as unpatriotic and threatened to boycott its products. Before long, social media was awash with #JustBurnIt and #BoycottNike hashtags, accompanied by images of destroyed or burned Nike clothing and trainers. Despite evidence of a decrease in business shares the day after the ad dropped, Nike’s sales went up 31% over the Labor Day weekend in the US.

This is not the first ad by Nike that has spurred national discussion. The same year, Nike released the ‘Nothing Beats a Londoner’ ad to mixed reviews. While the ad has been widely applauded for its positive and mobilizing message, particularly for young people, it has experienced criticism from outside the UK capital. Groups have argued that the tagline ostracizes people from the rest of the country who already feel underrepresented in the cultural sphere. Nonetheless, the ad’s production, along with its adept use of athletes like Mo Farah and musicians such as Skepta and AJ Tracey, has drawn acclaim.

Both ads were made by creative powerhouse Wieden + Kennedy.

Signaling a departure from its long-established ‘The Best a Man Can Get’ tagline, in 2019 Gillette decided to offer up its two cents on the #MeToo campaign.

Its ‘We Believe’ ad aimed to tackle the trending topic of toxic masculinity and encourage men to be the best they can be, by tackling everyday sexism and the institutionalized machismo latent in a “boys will be boys” mindset. Instead of promoting the all-American, white male model archetype, this ad offered up a more diverse, multi-dimensional image of the modern man. While this change in direction has been applauded by many, it has also prompted a backlash from a wide range of people, including some of its target audience who feel disgruntled with the less-than-flattering portrait of the 21st man.

Similarly, it has come under fire from feminist groups who question the razor brand’s commitment to the #MeToo cause, since its female grooming products cost more than the male equivalent. Despite the negative backlash, there has yet to be evidence released that suggests Gillette’s market performance or sales have been negatively impacted.

The campaign may seem like a bolt from the blue, but due to rising competition from online razor companies, Gillette had to rethink its marketing strategy. The likes of Dollar Shave Club and Harry’s have been making progress in the sector with their own marketing promoting inclusivity. Dollar Shave Club’s latest campaign starred drag queens while Harry’s recently released an ad with England striker Harry Kane, proclaiming he is ‘Not Afraid’ to go against traditional male stereotypes. As brands offering newer and cheaper alternatives to Gillette, it is easy to see why the shaving giant must evolve.

The ad was produced by Grey New York and was directed by This Girl Can’s Kim Gehrig.

Protein World: ‘Are you beach body ready?’ (2015)

Seeking a larger audience for its niche product, in 2015 Protein World released a series of ads on the London Underground. One of its posters, bearing the headline ‘Are you beach body ready?’, provoked public outrage and vigilante acts of vandalism.

The public took to social media to proclaim their disdain for the ad and accused it of promoting an unhealthy body image. The UK's Advertising Standards Authority received 378 complaints regarding the campaign, a petition to have the ads removed was launched and there was even a small demonstration held against it in Hyde Park. Looking to profit from the publicity surrounding the campaign, Carlsberg weighed in with the parody: ‘Are you beer body ready?’. However, despite the ad’s controversial nature, Protein World stood by its in-house produced campaign and elicited even more ire with its responses on social media; the brand called dissenters #fattysympathisers and took a shot at feminists that voiced their objection to the ad.

In the weeks to follow, the chief marketing officer of Protein World alleged that the outcry around the ads actually benefitted the company and that the £250,000 it had spent on the campaign resulted in over £1m in sales. Ultimately, the ASA did not uphold the complaints against Protein World regarding offense or social responsibility, but it did ban the ad on the grounds of making unauthorized health and nutrition claims.

However other body image ads have not been so lucky, illustrated by Jameela Jamil’s takedown of Avon’s anti-cellulite serum. Jamil, a former model and TV presenter, attacked the brand for what she saw as irresponsible advertising and body shaming of women, which triggered a major backlash against the cosmetics company on social media. Avon apologized for the offence caused by the ad and removed it.

Lush: ‘#Spycops’ (2018)

From its inception, Lush has positioned itself as a brand which supports anti-establishment thinking and social activism. This image, bolstered by its politically acerbic campaigns, has earned the brand a league of liberal followers. However, Lush’s 2018 campaign ‘#Spycops’, which looked to draw the public’s attention to alleged illegal behavior by undercover police, did not go down so well.

The cosmetics brand found itself in the eye of a Twitter storm, with outraged users calling for a boycott of Lush’s products and starting the hashtag #flushlush. The campaign was also criticized by the UK’s home secretary, Sajid Javid. In response to these complaints, Lush issued a statement to say that its campaign was not aimed at regular police officers but instead was leveled specifically at the undercover unit that infiltrated homes and created false relationships with political activists. Nonetheless, reports of police officers and members of the public intimidating Lush staff in their places of work led to the owners deciding to remove the window dressings.

In spite of the social media backlash, Lush was not impacted negatively by the reaction to its campaign. Lush is a business built on its reputation for social activism, highlighted by its various other campaigns such as ‘Error 404’, which called out the loss of internet access in some countries. BrandWatch even reported that sales increased after its supposed PR crisis.

Dove: Facebook misfire (2017)

The champion of ‘real beauty’ has come under fire recently for what some consumers have dubbed “whitewashing”. In a Facebook ad for Dove body wash, the brand chose to portray a black woman removing her top and metamorphosizing into a white woman after using the product. This sparked outrage among the brand’s social media followers, who slammed the business with hashtags like #DoneWithDove and called for a boycott of its products.

The ad was removed by Dove and the brand publicly apologized for its misdemeanor. This misfire is not the first of its kind for the beauty brand; there are a series of accusations of whitewashing that date back to 2011 in previous skincare campaigns, as well as the controversy caused by its Real Beauty bottle designs in 2017. Despite these setbacks, Dove has scored success with GirlGaze and Getty Images, in a move to create the world's largest photographic stock library created by women and non-binary individuals. This move will hopefully protect the brand from further critique by guaranteeing equal representation in its future advertising.

Dove is owned by Unilever and has worked with the likes of Ogilvy & Mather in producing ad campaigns.

The fast-food retailer experienced massive public backlash after it released an ad for its Filet-o-Fish burger which its UK audience deemed as using child bereavement to sell burgers.

The public took to Twitter, with users calling the advert "shameless" and "icky". After the ASA received 100 complaints from viewers, McDonald's decided to pull the ad. The burger chain apologized publicly for their misjudgment of the ad's insensitive nature, with a spokesperson insisting that: "It was never our intention to cause any upset.” The brand also came under fire from a number of UK bereavement charities including Grief Encounter, who reported having received "countless calls" from grieving children and partners over the advert. The ASA launched an investigation into the ad, but no further action was necessary.

The ad was created by McDonald's long-standing creative UK agency, Leo Burnett.

INSTAGRAM NOW MAKES IT EASY FOR USERS TO SHOP DIRECTLY FROM CELEBRITY POSTS

Content Courtesy of: adage.com

Written by: Olivia Raimonde

The platform’s “shopping from creators” expands a program used by brands