you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 103 points 1 year ago* (8 children)

This stinks of (rotten) meat lobby.

I hope the meat substitute industry comes up with some kind of 'it's not meat' marketing campaign to counter this.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    A company here just calls everything Salmo'n, Chicke'n and so on, technically it isn't the actual word.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    That seems pretty scummy and misleading. I'm not a fan of the restrictive naming Iike in the article, but the name shouldn't try to mislead either.

    A burger is more about the form, same even for sausage, steak is more gray area, something like "veggie minced meat" or stuff with "meat" in the name is a no-no imo

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Okay, I like it as I am looking for replacements for salmon or chicken. So if they start calling their burger burge'r to circument such rules I wouldn't mind.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    I get how similar naming can be useful in knowing what sort of product you're getting and what it can be used to replace, but I dislike more how it is purposefully misleading. Shouldn't be allowed to call it that close to salmon without it containing any salmon. Same for other similar ingredient names where there's a chance of confusion.

    A meat product being quirky and inverting the m so it is marketed as w'eat would just be... No.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -8 points 1 year ago

    I hope the meat substitute industry comes up with some kind of β€˜it’s not meat’ marketing campaign to counter this.

    Well, honestly it would be fucking time they come out with some name that not mimic the meat products name.

  • source
  • parent