America: A Culture of Convenience

Today it seems as if America is on the upswing when it comes to healthy eating. Grocery stores are filled with more health-conscious products such as 100 calorie snacks and Naked juice. Shopping at Whole Foods for more organic, locally-grown food is more common than ever before. Restaurants serve smaller portions for meals and provide low-calorie meals for their customers. Schools around the country are improving their menus. However, despite this growing trend of healthy eating, it still seems as if America is eating unhealthily. Driving past any number of fast food chains, the parking lot and drive-thrus always seem full, which makes sense with Americans spending over $140 billion on fast food each year and one-third of Americans considered to be overweight or obese.  This begs the question, how. How are American eating habits still so unhealthy despite the better availability of healthy and organic products? This is because Americans still value convenience over health and nutrition.

The nutrition of food products is under more scrutiny now than it was in the past. Consumers do want to have more whole grains, fiber, calcium, and vitamins in their meals. However according to respected online news service, foodnavigator-USA.com, which researches news pertaining to food and beverage development in America,  the three main driving consumer behaviors are “an increased reliance on sandwiches at mealtimes, the use of fewer fresh ingredients, and more take-out lunches” (Heller). The overall force behind these behaviors is convenience. American culture is defined by being constantly on the go. As the saying goes, time is money. Meals are now valued for the price and availability of ingredients and the preparation time. This is why sandwiches are becoming increasingly commonplace at the dinner table. They are quick and easy to fix.

The need for quick and easy meals is a trend that has been growing in America since the dawn of the TV dinner. In her article, “Eating at the Edge” Jamie Horwitz, a university professor, analyzes the way that Americans consume food and how they now eat within a “space of flow”. In other words, the food has become something that is worked around our daily activities rather than an activity itself. This basically boils down to the fact that most Americans no longer have set meal times where they gather with family or friends and eat face-to-face. This phenomenon started with the TV dinner. Rather than meals being shared around the family dinner table, they were now shared around the TV. Interestingly enough this started not because Americans love television, but because we like the ability to have small one serving meals that are easy to prepare and have no cleanup time. This has evolved to become the many one-serving meals that we see today, a trend that can be found in even the most unusual places, such as space.  Also in her article, Horwitz discusses the eating habits of American astronauts. She notes how they paralleled the change in the general American public’s eating habits. While they started with sit-down meals, the standard practice became eating small servings on your own. It even became more convenient for the astronauts to eat small meals by themselves to fit within the confines of their schedules (Horwitz 46). Whether it’s each family member getting their own individual sandwich, a college student popping an Easy Mac container in the microwave or even an astronaut eating while working on the International Space Station, Americans now crave the ability to make a small meal for themselves. By studying the steady changes of how we eat meals, you can see the drive toward convenience. Meals are shortened to the smallest possible amount of time and the easier it is to eat with one hand the better.

With the drive toward shorter preparation times, fresh foods have also become inconvenient in American culture today. Purchasing fresh, organic food is more expensive and requires more preparation. Eating a meal with primarily organic ingredients involves a trip to the closest Whole Foods Market where you spend more money than the local grocery store. This does not even take into account the time needed to prepare and cook the meal. Fresh food also spoils quickly, meaning that you have to resupply very often causing an even bigger expense problem. It is much easier for the average American to buy food that can be stored for long periods of time and ready at a moment’s notice. Despite these factors, people still want to eat meals that are prepared with fresh ingredients. Very few people would be willing to eat basic, microwavable meals for breakfast, lunch and dinner every day.  Thus, to accommodate both the need for fresh food and convenience, Americans have turned to restaurants. By eating at local restaurants, people can eat meals filled with relatively fresh ingredients without having to buy or prepare them. With restaurants

With an increase in take-out meals from restaurants, fast food chains have become a very common location to eat at, being the very definition of convenience. According to “US Fast Food Market Outlook 2010” a report done by RNCOS, a leading market research and information analysis company, consumers in the US spend nearly half of their food budget on restaurant. Almost 30% of the money is spent at fast food chains (RNCOS). So despite the very unhealthy food served at these restaurants, why is so much of Americans’ money going toward eating a Double Down at KFC or a Bacon Double Cheeseburger from Burger King? This is because along with the health risk, fast food restaurants provide many benefits to its customers, mainly convenience. They serve popular items that the consumer is familiar with;, few people in America are unaware of what a Big Mac is. Also, because Americans are familiar with the menus, deciding what you want and ordering requires little time. Most restaurants even use their average wait time to market to consumers. For example, McDonalds boasts a 5 minute wait time in many of their ads. Along with the time saved within the restaurant, is the time saved by driving to the restaurant. Because people will not travel too far for just okay food, fast food restaurants must be within a reasonable distance. Driving down the highway you’ll see at least four different fast food chains at every exit, with the same chain repeating every other exit. While this seems outrageous, it works in the companies favor. Americans prefer to have the many different options, for both when and what they eat. This is something that can be seen every day, with almost any activity.  

Because malls are filled with almost all demographics in America, it gives keen insight into American food culture. In almost any standard American mall, a certain selection of food is available at the food court, namely fast-food. In a personal, observational study of the Park Meadows Mall food court in Denver, Colorado, the food court appeared to be filled with numerous fast food options that while may have some nutritious options, undoubtedly allow shoppers to indulge in more unhealthy meal choices. Looking at the standard meal options, one sees certain commonalities in the food. Most have large portions with a large amount of calories that fill the weary shopper and allow them to continue on with renewed energy. The focus is not on the nutrition of what is being eaten, but rather on its ability to get them through the day. This can especially be seen with the fact that most malls are surrounded by fairly upscale restaurants such as Red Robin and the Macaroni Grill. Shoppers could leave the mall to go to these restaurants and eat healthier meals. Unfortunately they are too far away for the average shopper despite being just across the parking lot. This plays into how shoppers prefer the food court for its convenience.

Along with it being located within the mall, I made a few other observations about the convenience of the food court. Watching the shoppers I noticed the chaos of everyone rushing to get their food, eat and leave within a timely manner. Few groups would take their time and enjoy the break from bustling from store to store. Even the food court itself was designed so that shoppers spend as little time as necessary there. The room was composed of closely placed restaurant stands so shoppers could quickly see what was available and in some cases move from stand to stand so each member of the group could order from their favorite restaurant. The room also had an enormous amount of tables squished together so that no one would have to wait to sit. The food was also served on paper plates and plastic trays to trim the clean-up time. The food court itself was placed in the middle of the mall, so that no shopper had to go too far out of the way for a quick lunch break. Observing the food court showed how much Americans value convenience in their daily lives even with activities such as shopping.

Every day Americans find ways to fit more into their day. I find myself, an average college student, skipping breakfast to make it to an early class or heating up a meal in the microwave because walking to the dining hall feels like too much of a chore. While cutting down the time for our meals may be more time efficient and allow us to get more work done, it has a detrimental effect on our health. We choose less nutritious and higher-calorie meals because they take up less of our time, despite the fact that our culture is changing with organic and low-calorie foods being more available. Americans need to reevaluate what they value when it comes to food, before unhealthy, one-serving meals become the only things left to eat.  

                                                          

Works Cited

Heller, Loraine. “Convenience trumps health in American eating choices, report.” Foodnavigator-USA.com. 26 Oct 2006. 2012: William Reed Business Media SAS. <http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/Business/Convenience-trumps-health-in-American-eating-choices-report>

Horwitz, Jamie. “Eating at the Edge.” University of California Press. p.42-46. Souce: Gastronimca: The Journal of Food and Culture, Vol. 9, No. 3 (Summer 2009). <http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/gfc.2009.9.3.42>

“Fast Food Remains Recession Proof in US” RNCOS Industry Research Solutions. 05 May 2009. PRLog (Press Release). <http://www.prlog.org/10230013-fast-food-remains-recession-proof-in-us.html> 

The Very Rough Draft of America: A Convenient Culture

Today it seems as if America is on the upswing when it comes to healthy eating. Grocery stores are filled with more health-conscious products such as 100 calorie snacks and Naked juice. Shopping at Whole Foods for more organic, locally-grown food is more common than ever before. Restaurants serve smaller portions for meals and provide low-calorie meals for their customers. Schools around the country are improving their menus, especially by cutting out the availability of soda within schools. However, despite this growing trend of healthy eating, it still seems as if America is eating unhealthily. Driving past any number of fast food chains, the parking lot and drive-thrus always seem full, which makes sense with Americans spending over $140 billion on fast food each year. Two-thirds of Americans are considered overweight or obese.  This begs the question how. How are American eating habits still so unhealthy despite the better availability of healthy and organic products? This is because Americans still value convenience over health and nutrition.

The nutrition of food products is under more scrutiny now then it was in the past. Consumers do want to have more whole grains, fiber, calcium, and vitamins in their meals. However according to food navigator, the three main driving consumer behaviors are “an increased reliance on sandwiches at mealtimes, the use of fewer fresh ingredients, and more take-out lunches” (Foodnavigator-USA). The overall force behind these behaviors is convenience. American culture is defined by being constantly on the go. As the saying goes, time is money. Meals are now valued for the price and availability of ingredients and the preparation time. This is why sandwiches are becoming increasingly commonplace at the dinner table. They are quick and easy to fix. Fresh foods have also become inconvenient in American culture today. Purchasing fresh, organic food is more expensive and requires more preparation. Fresh food also spoils quickly, meaning that you have to resupply very often. Despite these factors, people still want to eat meals that are prepared with fresh ingredients. This is why there is an increase in take-out lunches from restaurants in America. People can eat meals filled with fresh ingredients without having to buy or prepare them. This can still be a healthy meal choice, but it depends on where they go.

To fit mealtimes more easily into a busy day, many people will risk eating dinner at fast food chains such as McDonalds for the quick single serving that it provides to its consumers. Fast food restaurants offer a lot of benefits to its consumers. They provide almost immediate service of a popular product that most people are familiar with; few people in America are unaware of what a Big Mac is. Because people are familiar with the menus, they do not have to spend any excess time at fast food chains. Also, fast food restaurants are also very easily accessible. Because people will not travel too far for just okay food, fast food restaurants must be within a reasonable distance. This adds into the convenience of the product as a whole. People can stop by a McDonald’s on their way to work and not have to wait twenty minutes for food (Jekanowski 2). However, there is more to the convenience of fast food chains. Along with the time and money saved by frequenting fast food restaurants, they also provide more energy-dense meals.

Because malls are filled with almost all demographics in America, it gives keen insight into American food culture. In almost any standard American mall, a certain selection of food is available at the food court, namely fast-food. In a personal, observational study of the Park Meadows Mall food court in Denver, Colorado, the food court appeared to be filled with numerous fast food options that while may have some nutritious options, undoubtedly allow shoppers to indulge in more unhealthy meal choices. Looking at the standard meal options, one sees certain commonalities in the food. Most have large portions with a large amount of calories that fill the weary shopper and allow them to continue on with renewed energy. The focus is not on the nutrition of what is being eaten, but rather on its ability to get them through the day. This can be seen in any age and ethnicity group. One study was done to observe the calorie-intake of various teenagers in a certain area. To make sure that the meals eaten by the subjects of the study were done in a more natural setting, they were instructed to eat at the local mall food court. In the study, the teenagers were observed to be eating high-calorie meals that accounted for a generous amount of the energy that is required of a teenager for the average day (Scene From a Mall: A Study of Teens and Fast Food). This study showed that especially when given the option of fast-food, a person will opt for the meal that will give them more energy ignoring the nutrition of the food itself. This study showed very simply how many Americans value food. The focus on food in the average day is on the value of the energy it provides, adding to the American preference for convenience.

The need for convenience of meals is a trend that has been growing in America since the dawn of the TV dinner. In her article, “Eating at the Edge” Jamie Horwitz, a university professor, analyzes the way that Americans consume food and how they now eat within a “space of flow”. In other words, the food has become an addition to social activities rather than a social activity in in of itself.  This basically boils down to the fact that most Americans no longer have set meal times where they gather with family or friends and eat face-to-face. This phenomenon started with the TV dinner. Rather than meals being shared around the family dinner table, they were now shared around the TV. Interestingly enough this started not because Americans love television, but we like the ability to have small one serving meals that are easy to prepare and have no cleanup time. This evolved to become the many one-serving products that we see today such as the Soup in Hand. Horwitz also discusses the eating habits of American astronauts. She notes how they paralleled the change in the general American public’s eating habits. While they started with sit-down meals, the standard practice became eating small servings on your own. It even became more convenient for the astronauts to eat small meals by themselves to fit within the confines of their schedules. By studying the steady changes of how we eat meals, you can see the drive toward convenience. Meals are shortened to the smallest possible amount of time and the easier it is to eat with one hand the better.

Food in American culture is defined by convenience. This convenience may be dependent on how much time it saves in preparing, how well it will energize you for the tasks of the day, or the amount of servings it provides. American culture is defined by getting the most out of the day whether it is work, school, or online shopping and this can have a detrimental effect on what we eat. Despite the fact that our culture is changing to reflect better on the food choices that we make with organic and low-calorie foods being more available, the need for convenience outweighs even the most health-conscious person. This need for convenience is something that moves past what we eat in American culture. With the availability of Wi-fi, anyone can access the Internet from almost anywhere. People can constantly check Facebook and their Email. American culture has an intense focus on chipping away the time involved with almost any activity. Mutli-tasking is one of the most important skills the average American can have to keep up with our fast-paced culture. This focus on streamlining efficiency and cutting down time has been helpful to our country. It is one of the main reasons that we have obtained so much influence in the world. However, it is not benefiting our health. This constant focus on time and working food into our schedule is costing Americans their health. Taking time out the day to eat healthy food, not just fitting it in when convenient, needs to become a part of our culture again. Otherwise, American culture may begin to degrade and become as unhealthy as the food that we cannot stop eating.

Works Cited

Heller, Loraine. “Convenience trumps health in American eating choices, report.” Foodnavigator-USA.com. 26 Oct 2006. 2012: William Reed Business Media SAS. <http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/Business/Convenience-trumps-health-in-American-eating-choices-report>

Horwitz, Jamie. “Eating at the Edge.” University of California Press. p.42-46. Souce: Gastronimca: The Journal of Food and Culture, Vol. 9, No. 3 (Summer 2009). <http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/gfc.2009.9.3.42>

Jekanowski, Mark D., Binkley, James K., Eales, James. “Convenience, Accessibility and the Demand for Fast Food.” Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics. 2001: Western Agricultural Economics Association. 26(1):58-74 <http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/31162/1/26010058.pdf>

“Scene From a Mall: A Study of Teens and Fast Food” Eating Disorders Review. Jul/Aug2004, Vol. 15 Issue 4, p4-4, 2/3p. EBSCOhost.

< http://0-web.ebscohost.com.bianca.penlib.du.edu/ehost/detail?sid=23817a99-5b4d-4f30-b8cb-d2358f0c9a07%40sessionmgr111&vid=6&hid=104&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=a9h&AN=14241958>

Horwitz's Eating in the "space of flow"

In his article Horwitz analyzes the way that Americans consume food in a different way than any of the other articles we have read. He focuses more on how Americans now eat within a “space of flow”. This basically boils down to the fact that most Americans no longer have set meal times where they gather with family or friends and eat face-to-face. He structured this by first laying out when this phenomena started, the TV dinner. Rather than meals being shared around the family dinner table, they were now shared around the TV. Interestingly enough this started not because Americans love television, but we like the ability to have small one serving meals that are easy to prepare and have no cleanup time. This evolved to become the many one-serving products that we see today such as the Soup in Hand. The author then went on to discuss the eating habits of American astronauts. He noted how they paralleled the change in the general American public’s eating habits. While they started with sit-down meals, the standard practice became eating small servings on your own. I found it interesting that they compared this with the European astronauts and how they prefer to eat in groups, which probably parallels the general European public’s eating habits. Horwitz also shows how the increase in long international flights has increased the amount of irregular eating habits. To facilitate this, countries now have many places that are open all night and cater to both people from different time zones and locals. Overall you can see how our culture has changed with how we eat our meals. We eat as a part of multitasking and fitting more into our day.

Horwitz compares the information to his own experience with being a professor at a university. Reading this article I could see a lot of what he was talking about in my own life. Being a college student, food can be somewhat of a time inconvenience. It’s difficult to fit regular meals in every day, with a schedule that changes daily and an immense amount of homework. When I’m rushed for time I often eat meals by myself. Also since the food served in college dining halls leaves a lot to be desired, I find myself having very little food for lunch or dinner, and then preparing small microwave meals once I get back to my room. My eating habits have changed a lot since I was at home eating three square meals a day at the dinner table. WIth my consistently changing schedule and the variety of food available to me in college, my eating habits have become a lot more relaxed both in what I eat and when I eat. As university Professor Horwitz notes, "The absence of dominant codes, customs, and practices is an invitation to innovation" (Horowitz 45). This is definitely seen within a college culture. I have become very innovative with preparing my own meals, which is caused by the lack of rules and restrictions on my life. I definitely feel that Horwitz’s conclusions are supported by the college student lifestyle. We eat more in the “space of flow”.

Horwitz, Jamie. "Eating at the Edge."

The Food Court; America's Pit Stop

The Food Court: America’s Pit Stop

Entering the Park Meadows food court, one is immediately struck by the chaos of the room. Countless families and groups of friends fill every corner. Everyone is determinedly walking, whether they are trying to be next in the line at the Taco Bell, chasing after a mischievous child, or looking for an open place to sit. The center of the room is filled with small tables, most able to seat four people. Very few tables are open; most are occupied by various shoppers. Purchased items in colorful bags can be seen sitting at their feet or hung along the back of a chair. Many groups sit at the tables and chat for a while, enjoying the time to relax. Others can be seen hurriedly wolfing down food, refueling before they hit the next store on their list. Most shoppers are casually dressed, jeans and a t-shirt being the common theme. An enormous variety of people can be seen throughout the food court, people of every ethnicity and age. Looking past the people in the room, the atmosphere of the room itself becomes more evident.

Most food courts in America have the same atmosphere and look. The typical American mall food court is a very large room, with generic art along the walls and a very simple cafeteria feel. However, some malls allow for some creative liberties within the food court. The Park Meadows mall has a very unique “Colorado” feel that would not be found in a food court in Northeastern United States. It has a very rustic feel with an enormous stone fireplace in the middle of the small crowded tables. Along one side of the fireplace, an expansive painting of a Colorado landscape can be seen. The room has vaulted ceilings with exposed wood beams along the top, giving the room the feel of a log cabin. The restaurants follow this by having identical design styles, each distinguishing itself with colorful signs and menus. The atmosphere is noisy, yet relaxed. Different songs can be heard floating about the room from different stores and restaurants. Casual conversations can be had at any table, giving the room a loud background noise that is constantly changing.

Along the walls fast-food restaurants are arranged, each with an extensive line of customers waiting to place their orders. Going through a buffet line of sorts, the customer is allowed to pick and choose their meal. Employees move the orders through quickly and efficiently. The people that work at the food court can be assembled in two groups—those who work at the restaurants and those who clean the tables. While many may think workers are workers there is a distinct difference between the two. The people who are working at the restaurants appear to generally be young, white people who are working to get through school. The people who are working as the cleaning staff appear to generally be middle-aged, ethnically diverse people who are working to provide for their families.

There is nothing special about the range of fast-food chains available to the shoppers; all can be found in any mall or shopping district. Each restaurant has a unique type of food—Chinese, Mexican, American sub sandwiches—with different meals on each menu. However, none stray too far from “Americanized” food, sticking with the classic Panda Express, Taco Bell, and Subway. All meals are served on paper plates and plastic trays, similar to a school cafeteria. The meals are all similarly priced, few exceeding $10. Despite the variety of meals that a customer has to choose from, most seem to boil down to a main dish, a side, and a fountain drink. Most of the meals also have very similarly sized portions. The meals come with large quantities of food, with most of it high in calories. This provides the shopper with more energy to continue with their tasks of the day, most moving on to the next store in the mall.

                Because malls are filled with almost all demographics in America, it gives keen insight into American culture. In almost any standard American mall, a certain selection of food is available at the food court, namely fast-food. The Park Meadows food court was filled with fast food options that while may have some nutritious options, undoubtedly allow shoppers to indulge in more unhealthy meal choices. Looking at the standard meal options, one sees a certain commonalities in the food. Most have large portions with a large amount of calories that fill the weary shopper and allow them to continue on with renewed energy. The focus is not on the nutrition of what is being eaten, but rather on its ability to get them through the day. This can be seen in any age and ethnicity group. One study was done to observe the calorie-intake of various teenagers in a certain area. To make sure that the meals eaten by the subjects of the study were done in a more natural setting, they were instructed to eat at the local mall food court. In the study, the teenagers were observed to be eating high-calorie meals that accounted for a generous amount of the energy that is required of a teenager for the average day (Scene From a Mall: A Study of Teens and Fast Food). This study showed that especially when given the option of fast-food, a person will opt for the meal that will give them more energy ignoring the nutrition of the food itself. This study showed very simply how many Americans value food. The focus on food in the average day is on the value of the energy it provides. While this is probably the most important aspect of food, it allows people to dismiss the nutrition of it. Through these observations of the eating habits of people in mall food courts, many different connections can be made between food and culture in America.

Works Cited

“Scene From a Mall: A Study of Teens and Fast Food” Eating Disorders Review. Jul/Aug2004, Vol. 15 Issue 4, p4-4, 2/3p. EBSCOhost.

< http://0-web.ebscohost.com.bianca.penlib.du.edu/ehost/detail?sid=23817a99-5b4d-4f30-b8cb-d2358f0c9a07%40sessionmgr111&vid=6&hid=104&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=a9h&AN=14241958>

Source Link

In my short essay I will be using this article that I found on EBSCOhost on a study done on the calorie intake of teenagers eating at the mall. I will use this article to show how American culture associates food as a means of getting energy, with loss of focus on taste and nutrition.

Link
http://0-web.ebscohost.com.bianca.penlib.du.edu/ehost/detail?sid=23817a99-5b4d-4f30-b8cb-d2358f0c9a07%40sessionmgr111&vid=6&hid=104&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=a9h&AN=14241958

Cate and O'Donnell's connections to food

Reading both of these articles, I realize how food can be attached to many different cultures, even those that many would not consider a culture such as prison. In O’Donnell’s article “The Cultural Politics of Eating in Shenzhen, the author explores how the food economy in China, specifically in the city of Shenzhen illustrates how the people of that culture feel about the politics of that country. By following the history of Shenzhen, she shows how the opinion of food changed over time. The first people to populate Shenzhen saw food as a way to equate every person of the city. It played into the socialist believes that were throughout China. Food was shared by people of all backgrounds. The lack of hunger within the city was also seen as a way to show that their system was working. Then as people of different cities and cultures began to arrive in Shenzhen, the way that food was distributed throughout the city changed. It became more capitalist as different markets emerged to feed the different tastes of the migrants and the locals. This caused more social division within this city. Many people equated this to the current drive for capitalism within the country of China. While people wanted social change, it came with a price. This article showed how food was tied to the Chinese culture. People could use food to back their political beliefs, starving themselves for the good of the people of China from a socialist standpoint or creating different food markets to help themselves as an individual from a capitalist standpoint. Both views using food to help establish their point.

                In Cate’s article “Breaking Bread with Spread” the author shows how the food in a prison became an identifying part of their culture. In the prison, the food was created to be as simple as possible to accommodate all of the inmates taste preferences and needs. Because of this the inmates created their own dishes so that they could put their own individual flavor into what they were eating. By using what was available to them through the prison they were able to create their own culture within the prison. People of similar backgrounds dined together, tying the food to their own community. I thought that this article was very interesting because it explored a community that most people don’t consider. When a person is sent to prison they are often forgotten about until they reenter society. In this article O’Donnell explores the community that is created within the prison until the inmates leave. This community centers around the spreads that are created and shared.

                These two articles were very interesting to read, following how food connects with different communities. In both articles the people use food to help establish themselves within the community. This shows how while communities may be unfathomably different, they all connect to food.

Comparing Blog Posts (SE2)

Sarah Heerman's Essay Post

Reading Sarah Heerman's Essay I saw a lot of similarities with my own essay. In her essay she compares how advertisements can be targeted to either men or female audiences based on the appeal of the ad. I noted this in my own commenting on how Gatorade ads are more suited to a male audience, showing football and basketball stars, while the Crystal Light ads appeal to women with bright colors that give the product a healthier feel. In her post Sarah talks about how ads target females by showing the product as very healthy because that is how most women choose what they eat. The Donut commercial has to literally tell the female audience to succumb to the temptation of eating a donut. In comparison, the ad targeted toward the male audience, the alcoholic drink, was more about power and manliness. Her own views help support my own observations between ads targeted at men and women.

Gatorade vs. Crystal Light

Gatorade vs. Crystal Light

Turn on the TV or flip through a magazine and almost all that can be seen is advertisements. Whether many know it or not, these advertisements are geared to a very specific audience. Now this may be done with whatever medium the advertisement is seen in: commercials for men’s razors shown during golf games or yogurt commercials during a Lifetime movie. However, the marketing behind the product also tailors the advertisement to a specific audience based on what they value through what is shown in the picture or commercial. This can be seen with almost any product; however, the differences in audiences for both Gatorade and Crystal Light can be very clearly seen.

When you first watch the Gatorade Revolution Ad, which came out in 2010, you notice that it is similar to many other sports drink commercials. You see a lot of people performing athletic feats after drinking whatever beverage they are trying to sell. However, this ad gives a lot more incentive to whoever watches it by using many different techniques to target a certain audience. In the beginning of the commercials they show many clips of the early beginnings of some sports, with all of the athletes drinking water to rehydrate. Then you see how in 1965 Gatorade was developed and revolutionized the performance of every sport. You see the greats of almost any sport: Michael Jordan, Peyton Manning, Mia Hamm and many others, drinking Gatorade. Then tying into this Gatorade tells you that it’s time for a new revolution with the development of their new performance enhancing drinks and energy gels. The commercial brings you in with its history giving Gatorade credibility. Since it has been around since the 60s you can trust that it is the best. Because Gatorade has been a long-standing institution in sports, they then entice you to continue with the revolution by using the new three-system line of Prime, Perform and Recover. While many may not spend extra money buying three separate products when they are used to only buying one, Gatorade is saying that using these products is the only way to keep with the times. Tying this whole idea together is the catchy song that is playing throughout the commercial. It begins with a very simple tune to parallel the simple beginnings of sports. Then as Gatorade is developed and the game is changed, the song also changes. It is a very subtle way that the commercial keeps the audience interested and following along. Watching sports will also almost always appeal to the emotion of the viewer. Watching Michael Jordan slam dunk a basketball provokes emotion in almost anybody, even those who do not particularly Gatorade, being a sports drink is mostly geared toward male athletes. This can be seen with the many influential male athletes that are shown drinking Gatorade. However, Mia Hamm and Serena Williams can be seen in this commercial. Also one of the first clips shown is of a woman playing tennis. This commercial is also targeted to women; however, Gatorade recognizes that more men would be likely to drink Gatorade than women, so there are more men athletes in the commercial.

Unlike Gatorade commercials, which are geared to a more athletic and generally more male audience, commercials for drinks such as Crystal Light have very different advertisements. In one particular commercial three women dance around to an Estelle song each in an outfit that looks similar to a particular kind of fruit flavor. This commercial is clearly geared toward a female audience. Female audiences are attracted to this kind of product because the commercial gives it a sense of being light and free. After drinking it they will be able to dance around, while still knowing that they had a natural fruit drink. Also by including an Estelle song within the commercial it gives the audience the impression that this artist approves and drinks Crystal Light. Similar to Gatorade, people want to be doing what their heroes and inspirations are doing. Whether it’s drinking a certain drink or going on the same diet, the general population can’t help but follow celebrities. This commercial also appeals to the emotion of the audience by having an upbeat song and people dancing. It leaves the audience happy, enticing them to buy the product to stay happy.

These commercials show how women value what they are drinking differently then men and athletic women. While both audiences value what their heroes are drinking and how these drinks will make them feel, they search for different outcomes. Rather than jumping higher or running longer, general women value drinking something natural and light. A drink that is both healthy and delicious. Whereas the audience of the Gatorade commercial value performing better and drinking what other athletes will be drinking to keep with the times. Interestingly, the targeted audience of the Gatorade does not seem to value the healthiness of the drink. While one of the main reasons people drink Gatorade is to replenish electrolytes, which is very important after exercising, this does not seem to be important in this advertisement. The health of the drink is not as important as who is drinking it. By recognizing the different values of different audiences, companies can target specific audiences with their commercials. This is a very powerful tool to entice viewers to buy certain products.

Commercials Used

Gatorade Revolution Ad 2010

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYgFjBDoHNA

Crystal Light Ad 2009

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06aW9Vgko78

Freedman and Jurafsky Readings

Reading this article I noticed many ideas that I had already discovered myself. This idea of more expensive brands of food using the concepts of superiority and distinction to sell their food is something that I have already noticed in society. I have always seen myself on the “lower-socioeconomic  status” end of this. When I see a Naked drink or a pop bag of chips they just feel too pretentious. They keep trying to convince me that they are so much better for you and taste better, but I have never really gone for it. I think that I will always be content with my bag of greasy Lays potato chips. Cheap, tasty, and gone in ten minutes. When I’m craving potato chips I’m not looking for a health conscious snack that will forever convince me that I am not eating potato chips but some new way that society is trying to trick me into eating what I see “not worth the health” food. I think that this goes along the lines of the authenticity that the authors were discussing. They were noting how while the upper-classes may see the natural authenticity of a product, the lower-classes may see the traditional authenticity of a product. I think that there is some truth to this. I know that I have always eaten Lays ever since lunch time at Grandma’s house when I was a kid. I still choose Lays chips over all others because it is what’s familiar to me. The thought of switching over to an expensive brand of potato chip with only all-natural ingredients and 0 everything is frightening.

One of the aspects of this article that I found most interesting was how the authors used the analysis of a very specific product, potato chips, to show how the linguistics of almost any food advertisement can be used to target people of a certain socioeconomic status. By using the concepts of authenticity, distinction, health, and language they were able to show the different ways that advertisers are trying to reach certain markets within the potato chip industry. These concepts can be applied to almost any type of food sold to the public. For example if you consider the Naked drinks or Vitamin water. These brands will use very different words to describe the drink providing a certain distinction above normal juices or god forbid sodas. With these different tools for understanding how advertisers target certain groups of people, we can understand the impact that these food products have on certain groups of people and how they use these foods to maintain their “higher status”.

Lutefisk: the Worst and Best Meal

Lutefisk: the Worst and Best Meal

I have never really considered food to be an important factor in my life. The only importance that I had ever seen in food was survival. I never really saw any cultural impact of eating a Poptart every morning for breakfast or having chicken for dinner. This changed when I began to try to identify more with my heritage and the culture of my heritage. Being what my dad lovingly refers to as a “European mutt”, it’s always been difficult to feel connected any one culture or country. Visiting my friend on St. Patrick’s Day, which is the biggest celebration of the year for her very Irish family, always made me feel kind of jealous that my family didn’t really do anything special. Her siblings would come home from different places in the city and in the country for just this one day.  Her mom would prepare corned beef and cabbage and Irish soda bread and everyone would eat it. It was one of the most important things that they did that day and I never really understood why. That changed one Christmas that my family spent in Denver a few years ago.

 Being only a quarter Norwegian, I never really thought much about the culture. We never celebrated being Norwegian; I didn’t even know I was Norwegian until I was twelve. However, I was soon in for a real treat at my cousin’s Christmas dinner which had one of the traditional Norwegian Christmas meals: lutefisk. Now to say that lutefisk isn’t the most appealing food is a bit of an understatement. It’s cod that has been soaked in lye for a week and then cooked.  Now while this may sound harmless, the best description that I have been able to come up for it is gelatinous milky fish. The fish looked perfectly harmless, but then my cousin accidentally bumped the table which caused the fish to start dancing like a bowl of Jell-O.  Imagine my horror when my grandma told me that I had to eat it because it was tradition. Since I had never eaten this before that hardly seemed like an adequate reason, but you don’t argue with grandma who helpfully spooned some on my plate as I gagged at the toxic smell that wafted up to me. As I was debating feigning sickness while we sat around the table, my grandma began to talk about the history of lutefisk and why we eat it during Christmas. She talked about how the way that lutefisk was prepared allowed our ancestors to store the fish in the cold and provided a delightful Christmas meal. She then talked about how her own mother and father had travelled from Norway to the United States to provide for their family. As she talked about our family’s history, I hate to admit that I wasn’t paying complete attention. My attention had been claimed by my four year-old cousin who had spent the entire discussion trying to blow out the candles on the table. Then all of a sudden it was time to eat. Luckily my cousins who had suffered through this meal before had developed a way to eat the lutefisk. It involves a very large piece of lefse, a rather tasty Norwegian flatbread, topped with a heaping pile of mashed potatoes, some ham and then just enough lutefisk to make grandma happy. The meal actually wasn’t that bad and I really enjoyed spending this time with my family.

It wasn’t until the next year when the promise of lutefisk was looming over my head that I discovered that I was actually looking forward to it. I was surprised because I cringed at just remembering the pungent odor of the fish. However, I grew to understand that even though lutefisk has to be one of the foulest things that I have ever eaten, it has helped me grow closer to my family and to my heritage. I discovered that I was more curious about my heritage and my culture. I learned a few Norwegian phrases that I could use and I did one of my school research projects on Norwegian culture. I also felt closer to the side of my family that I never have been able to see that often. The next Christmas I saw how my family came together to prepare the lutefisk, with all of my relatives contributing except the kids that stayed as far away from the smell as possible. And this year I listened as my grandma told the history of lutefisk and of our family and I felt even more connected to relatives that have been long gone, but have still contributed to who I am today. We ate the lutefisk together as a family, laughing at those who were eating it for the first time, enjoying the company of some close friends that came along and point blank refused to eat it, and having contests to see who was brave enough to eat the most lutefisk. It seems almost impossible that such a simple thing could bring people together so easily. Now I am beginning to understand the importance that food can have on a person. I also understand the closeness that my friend’s family felt when preparing their traditional Irish meal on St. Patrick’s Day. Food has the undeniable, yet not fully understood, quality of bringing people together.