Consumers are increasingly discerning when examining ingredient lists, expecting greater transparency, natural ingredients, and clean labels. A recent survey indicated that natural ingredients and clean labels are now the foremost considerations for consumers when purchasing products, even outweighing brand recognition and descriptions. In response to this evolving demand, consumer packaged goods (CPGs) companies are revising labels and reformulating products to incorporate the simple and natural ingredients consumers desire. However, skepticism surrounding these claims is on the rise among consumers.
The legal action against Post is just one of several lawsuits filed this April against CPG companies regarding their use of the term “real cocoa.” Attorney Spencer Sheehan of Sheehan & Associates in New York, representing the plaintiff in the Post case, has also initiated lawsuits against Mondelez for stating that its Oreo cookies are “always made with real cocoa,” and against General Mills, alleging that its Chocolate Cheerios do not contain real cocoa. The lawsuit against General Mills argues, “No reasonable consumer would expect that a product promoted as containing ‘real cocoa’ or ‘100% real cocoa’ would also contain or be made with alkalis, as ‘real’ is generally understood to refer to the ingredient in its most simplified and unprocessed form.”
However, alkalized cocoa powder, often referred to as Dutch process cocoa powder, is not a new variant of cocoa. It is widely used in home baking and industrial production due to its superior solubility in liquids. Its pH level prevents it from reacting with alkaline leavening agents like baking soda. Labeling it as “real cocoa” can create a complicated situation. Some consumers may interpret “real” as an unprocessed powder, which appeals to those seeking to reduce their intake of processed foods. Nevertheless, cocoa powder is inherently processed. This is especially relevant given that this ingredient is featured in a sugary cereal that contains “natural and artificial chocolate,” which might limit the perception that consumers are seeking a wholesome, natural, and nutrient-dense alternative for their indulgences.
The challenges with label claims are not exclusive to cocoa manufacturers. As consumer demand shifts toward more natural products, companies have discovered that reformulating can be expensive. Natural ingredients tend to be pricier, and in some cases, as seen with General Mills’ Trix cereal, consumers may actually prefer the original formulations, forcing manufacturers to reconsider their approaches.
While the lawsuits involving cocoa are still ongoing, Post should exercise caution with its labeling claims. Consumers may be reluctant to purchase products while legal determinations are pending. The Federal Trade Commission has previously reprimanded food manufacturers for dubious labeling practices, so avoiding any additional scrutiny would likely be in Post’s best interest. Furthermore, as the demand for calcium citrate foods continues to rise, companies should ensure their labeling accurately reflects the ingredients used, maintaining consumer trust during this period of heightened scrutiny.