The Rhetoric of Food

Rhetoric surrounds food in terms of identity, nutrition, and marketing (to name a few), and the rhetoric of food is constantly changing. At one time carbohydrate rich foods and fat free products were the keys to healthy living. When waistlines continued to expand because the activity levels of consumers did not measure up to their increased caloric intake, protein and fat only diets quickly replaced carbo-loading. Bacon took precedence over heaping bowls of spaghetti. Foods that were once commonly known as blueberries or broccoli have now been termed “Super foods,” and “Clean Foods” do not just indicate how well you have washed your vegetables. Paleo dieters swear that the key to long life is to eat the Paleolithic foods the cavemen ate 10,000 years ago, even though we do not have the same 10,000-year-old digestive systems. Food marketers and nutritionists are constantly coming up with rhetorical strategies to advance new diets, and the proven results people experience from these diets are usually not based on scientific experimentation, but on consumers’ testimonials.  

Consumers often times identify with the rhetoric that accompanies certain food consumption lifestyles. We literally are becoming what we eat. There are vegans, vegetarians, the Paleo community, food snobs, and the fast-food nation to name a few. Certain foods are linked to racial-ethnic minority groups (such as fried chicken and biscuits with African Americans), even though members of many racial groups may eat these same foods. People who identify with specific food eating practices are often times associated with the stereotypes that go along with their choice of practice. For example, people on the Paleo diet are assumed to be intense, rigorous outdoor exercisers, who try to replicate the activities their ancestors once did. Whereas, vegans and vegetarians are often viewed as yoga-practicing tree huggers, who only wear clothes made out of natural fibers. Those who choose to maintain a “clean diet” (avoiding processed foods and foods with unnatural ingredients) may be viewed as environmentally conscious individuals who drive smart cars and advocate anything green. Advertisers and marketers have not only picked up on the rhetoric that surrounds food-eating practices, but they have capitalized off of it. 

Building off of the rhetoric associated with food eating practices, advertisers and marketers produce packaging and advertising campaigns that seem to appeal to these various lifestyles. Although the same form of soy protein is used in various brands of protein powders, body builders may be drawn to the canister of Met-Rx featuring a muscular man with chiseled features over the earth tone colored canister of Genisoy. Cheetos Puffs and Cheetos Simply Natural Puffs have more or less the same nutritional content, with the main difference in their ingredients being the exclusion of the artificial color Yellow 6. Yet, their packages are strikingly different. The package of Cheetos Simply Natural Puffs has a smooth matte finish and is colored in a calming beige and soft orange, which may be more appealing to people striving for an all natural lifestyle. The package of Cheetos Puffs, on the other hand, is metallic, bright turquoise and orange, and features a cartoon cat, which may be more appealing to the interests of super hyper kids. The rhetoric associated with foods really dictates the design processes for advertisers and marketers. If consumers did not already construct their identities based upon the food consumption choices they make, advertisers will do it for them.