Wendy’s has sent the CSPI a scary legal threat letter over a photoshopped sample (click image for larger version) of a possible Wendy’s menu board included as an exhibit in the ongoing “Menugate” lawsuit.
Wendy’s claims in a letter send both to CSPI and to the United States District Court of New York, that CSPI is presenting the menu board as authentic when it was in fact “doctored” (Wendy’s words) and accuses CSPI and it’s of being “misleading” and of “improper use of Wendy’s trademark.”
As Constant Readers of the blog are already aware, there’s a legal battle going on over a new NYC regulation that requires large chain restaurants that already provide nutritional information to add calorie info to their menus.
We were initially skeptical of this regulation until Subway went ahead and complied with it. The resulting menus were exceptionally useful and uncluttered-looking, and we were convinced that the regulation has merit and would help consumers make better food choices.
Incidentally, we were also sort of shocked to learn, through model menus supplied by the CSPI, that some Starbucks venti fraps have more than 700 calories.
If we didn’t know that, does the average consumer? Probably not.
And now Wendy’s is sending scary legal letters over hypothetical menus.
We have to ask you just one thing: Why would the Center for Science in the Public Interest represent a menu board with calorie information on it as an authentic Wendy’s menu board in a lawsuit where Wendy’s is trying to keep calorie information off the menu board?
Here’s the paragraph in question, the “misleading” one, in which Dr. Margo Wootan of the CSPI supposedly misrepresents the photoshopped board:
22. See Appendix C for model Starbucks and Wendy’s menus. These model menus demonstrate that providing calories on the menu can be done without being confusing, difficult to read, or cluttering the menu.
According to the CSPI, Wendy’s is the chain at the forefront of weaseling out of the new regulation.
In an effort to slip through a loophole that lets restaurant chains who do not already provide nutritional information opt out of the requirement, Wendy’s added a disclaimer to their website claiming that their nutritional information doesn’t apply to NYC.
Are we meant to believe that just by adding a legal disclaimer a Double Stack won’t make you fat?
Here’s Wendy’s explanation, from their website:
We regret that Wendy’s cannot provide product calorie information to residents or customers in New York City. The New York City Department of Health passed a regulation requiring restaurants that already provide calorie information to post product calories on their menu boards — using the same type size as the product listing.
We fully support the intent of this regulation; however, since most of our food is made-to-order, there isn’t enough room on our existing menu boards to comply with the regulation. We have for years provided complete nutritional information on posters inside the restaurant and on our website. To continue to provide caloric information to residents and customers of our New York City restaurants on our website and on our nutritional posters would subject us to this regulation. As a result, we will no longer provide caloric information to residents and customers of our New York City restaurants.
We regret this inconvenience. If you have questions about this regulation, please contact the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene and refer to Health Code Section 81.50.
Made to order? What? Subway doesn’t seem to be having a problem, are their subs not “made to order?” In any case, being located in NYC didn’t stop the Consumerist from accessing nutritional information via Wendy’s site.
Anyway, thanks to Wendy’s misguided legal bullying, we’ve now read Dr. Wootan’s testimony and have learned some interesting facts about the need for better menu labeling. Think you know how many calories are in your food?
Did you know…
Two jelly-filled doughnuts at Dunkin’ Donuts have fewer calories than a sesame bagel with cream cheese?
A Frappuccino at Starbucks can have 200 more calories than the same size cappuccino?
A whole fried onion appetizer at a typical table service restaurant has 1,300 more calories than the fried mozzarella sticks?
We didn’t!
Dr. Wootan’s Testimony
Wendy’s Scary Legal Letter To CSPI (PDF)
Wendy’s Scary Legal Letter To The Court (PDF)
CSPI’s response to Wendy’s Scary Legal Letter (PDF)
(Photo:CSPI)
More From Consumerist
-
Wendy’s Tells Customers To Tweet At Wrong Username Two Weeks Too Early
-
Wendy’s & McDonald’s Teach Readers Disappointing Lessons In Ads Vs. Reality
-
Lawmakers Call On Equifax To Prove That Scary-Huge Employment-Info Database Is Legal
-
Debt Collectors And DAs Team Up To Scare Customers Who Bounce Checks
-
23 Things Debt Collectors Are Not Allowed To Do
“Wendy’s claims in a letter send both to CSPI and to the United States District Court New York…”
Huh? Letters to the court? What kind of jackassery is this?
Anyway, watch the law of unintended consequences rear it’s ugly head: due to NYC’s nanny-state regulation, the rest of us our losing our opportunity to really find out what’s in that food as restaurants strip nutritional information off their WEBSITES.
Sure, the market (and hopefully, the ballot box) will eventually sort this out – if consumers want the information badly enough, they’ll demand it – but in the meantime, NYC’s paternalistic attitude is having repercussions on the rest of us.
Looking at Wendy’s nutrition guide (PDF, but really, take a look; possibly not available if you live in New York), you’ll find that it’s one of the most complete nutritional guides that I’ve seen available. If you skip to page 5, you’ll see that they actually break down each of their ingredients. They also do nice little extra like allergens, sodium levels, and so on.
I’ve been trying to find the exact wording of 81.50 Health Code Regulation, but haven’t been able to. Anyone can help me out with that? I ask because Wendy’s states, “[H]owever, since most of our food is made-to-order, there isn’t enough room on our existing menu boards to comply with the regulation.”
If you look at the PDF, you’ll understand their concern if the regulation says (and as I said, I don’t know) they have to list every derivation of their menu. They do make their food fresh. There’s no binning like at McDonald’s or Burger King. You order a double cheeseburger, and they make it when you order it. They have their “standard toppings” but it’s not like McDonald’s where your “special order” or “grill order” screws up the whole clockwork. They make their sandwiches to order.
As I said in my previous post, then, why does everyone hate Wendy’s when they’ve been providing the information for years and years, while there’s no requirement that the Russian Tea Room provide the caloric content (or suffering content) of their foi gras?
@SadSam:
no cheese and no chips.
No WONDER you’re sad!
Why use my comment? Well, you just might be interested in the full story. Yes, I work for Wendy’s.
Wendy’s already provides calories for all its products on a nutrition poster in every US resaurant. You’ll also find the listed numbers for fats (incl trans fats), sodium, cholesterol, carbos and proteins. We also list potential allergins for every product.
We’re against posting the calories on the menuboard because we ALREADY offer far more than the regulation requires. Why do we need to post in two places?
For nearly 30 years, we’ve provided nutrition info to our customers. You can use a nutrition calculator on http://www.wendys.com to learn the total nutrition components for any meal combination you desire.
Does this look — or sound — like we have something to hide?
King County, Washington (where Seattle is) recently enacted a law like NYC’s. The big differences are that 1) it only requires items that have been on the menu for 60 days or more to be labeled, so there’s no requirement to provide information for customized items, and 2) it applies to all restaurants with 10 or more locations, regardless of whether they give out nutritional information already or not.
I believe CSPI did this to show that it IS possible for Wendy’s to show this information on their menus, despite Wendy’s protesting that they can’t do it.
Simple solution to this calorie problem has been found and is being used by a small local chain of stores in the MA area.
The chain is called “Know Fat” and it’s a low-fat and healthier alternative to fast food (i.e. french fries are cooked in vegetable oil and burgers are less greasy)
When you get your receipt with all your food that you bought on it, the receipt has the calorie listing for each item that you bought and totals the calories next to your price total.
I think it’s genius!
p.s. I can’t remember or not but I think they had the calories on their menu as well….
@Black Bellamy: Expensive how? Just how much would it cost to have ballpark caloric information on the menus? If it isn’t going to stop anyone from eating their (I suppose only “fat fucks” eat at Wendys) then why are they fighting it so hard?
@Beerad: No, it’s not just you. I think the assumption is everyone should already know what is and isn’t bad for you and if it’s bad you should never eat it. You aren’t supposed to consider whether cake A has less fat or calories than cake B because CAKE IS BAD, DON’T EAT IT STUPID FAT PERSON!!1!ONE
I can only assume these people subsist on a diet of just vegetables and water.
If you’re eating fast food, you should not be concerned about caloric intake. It would be really nice if everyone could see their caloric intake, but if you’re eating fast food then you need to re-evaluate your health goals.
[www.nutritiondata.com]
@hustler: It’s not an all-or-nothing thing. I may eat fast food only once a week, and otherwise keep a close watch on my intake (or, rather, allow my wife to do so). If the menu has calorie count on it, that means I can make better decisions that one time a week when I am trying to get a grab-and-go breakfast in a hurry. To be sure, all fast food is bad — but some is worse than others, and claiming that the world should be segmented into those who care and those who don’t give a shit (rather than allowing for gray areas or middle ground) is simply shortsighted.
Know what the funny thing is? Check this out, printed on the bottom of the Wendy’s site:
HEY WENDY’S–WE WANT CALORIE DISCLOSURE ON YOUR MENUS.
(Or Wendy’s has apparently decided the public doesn’t deserve to know that they’re eating a 1500 calorie sandwich
)
@dennyl: Ooo, pray tell… are you a Wendy’s manager, or franchise owner??
Obviously this is a great law, very necessary. People ought to be able to make informed decisions about what to buy, especially when it comes to food. It’s telling that restaurants are so desperate to keep this information hidden: they know that the food they are selling is unhealthy, and they know sales will go down if consumers realize that. Here’s hoping this requirement becomes nation-wide.
I think it should be required to disclose all nutritional information to customers in places where you essentially have no choice of what to eat, such as in travel rest stops and airports. Since you are being forced to eat at these places, disclosing nutritional information is very important so you can compare choices of what you have available to you. It should be required in all fast food chains and all restaurants but I don’t think that will ever happen because the companies know they are selling unhealthy food to you and that if they disclosed all the information on a menu that you would either buy less of it or not buy it at all and they would lose sales.
No Denny it doesn’t sound like you have anything to hide.
Look, the basic issue here is health related. I want to know (within reasonable limits) what I’m eating and I want my children to know as well. I’m going to suggest to my local lawmakers both at a city and a state level that this NYC law is worthy of adoption.
With the health issues we have in America combined with a Health Care system that’s poor at best we each need to start accepting some of the responsibility involved in our own health. To me that means making educated choices about diet, exercise, alcohol and tobacco to name a few.
I’ve quit smoking and joined a gym. I eat at home more so that I can have better control over what goes into my body. When I do eat out I want to make informed decisions. If Wendy’s (or McDonald’s or any other QSR) doesn’t help me do that then I’ll pick places that do.
@DennyL.
Yes. You are afraid to display the same information on your menu. It’s that simple. The vast majority of people will never look up the information for themselves. You know this. You are trying to weasel out of a law designed to help consumers make better choices when ordering. Even worse, you are now removing previously available information from the city trying to enforce this.
Your statement that you “cannot” provide calorie information is a lie. Of course you can.
IT’S RIGHT THERE ON YOUR WEBSITE.
At the end of the second paragraph, you contradict yourself and correctly state “we *will* no longer provide caloric information to residents and customers of our New York City restaurants.”
Hmm, time to re-join CSPI and support the efforts to fend off corporate bullies.
I am APPALLED that the response to a law requiring nutritional information on the menu results in companies removing that information altogether. It seems pretty obvious that a secondary law of requiring nutritional information for chains of a certain size is required as well. Isn’t that in effect already in some states?
Also, for those that say that if you don’t like it, don’t eat there–for me, this is more about a public health and education issue. People who care about this sort of thing already aren’t the ones we need to worry about.
And I didn’t know a small fries was as many calories as a burger. I’m pretty nutrition-conscious, but I don’t have this stuff memorized.
I’m not opposed to the law, I just think it should be applied to all restaurants, regardless of size or convenience. People are quick (and correct) to demonize fast food as unhealthy, but I think the average diner’s hair would stand on end if they knew just how much fat was pumped into their expensive dinner at the Pompous Room.
I’ve known about the calorie content of Starbucks stuff even though I don’t drink coffee. Although I supposed I don’t really have to drink coffee to go to Starbucks considering they’re essentially selling milkshakes packed with a zillion calories.
@silverlining: Yes, it does sound like you have something to hide when you act like New Yorkers don’t deserve the same disclosure that the rest of the country gets.
You’re a corporate shill, that’s obvious, and you’re trying to justify the behavior of a company that cares more about its bottom line than peoples’ health.
Change the damn menus. Your lies are uncovered, so just do it already. It’s obvious that you can’t win.
I agree that the laws should apply to all restaurants, regardless of size, as well as adding nutritional information to alcoholic drinks too… Large corporation will always attempt to get around a law they ‘feel’ they can’t comply with… Anybody with photoshop skills can show how a company IS capable of complying with the law, yet companies make the lamest excuses as to why they can’t comply.