Interesting. They seem pretty defensive, but quite clear. Somehow, though, the message is wildly absurd.
Here's what I gleaned from the ad: artificial is bad, natural is good. Mother Nature is responsible for sugar, the perfect sweetness of sugar. Why would mother nature harm us?
The banner ad linked to the main page of the campaign which offered up a taste comparison of sugar versus artificial sweeteners. Apparently, sugar, just like a crisp apple, is natural and has been around since 200 B.C.
On the other hand, we've got the "phonies", artificial sweeteners, which are concocted by chemists (who are clearly not Mother Nature, and don't have our best interests at heart), and were developed in the last half of the last century. It's all so scary and new. . . how can we trust something that hasn't been around since 200 B.C.?
(Seems like if the folks at gonaturalsugar.com were so eager to get us all on the natural path to sweetness, they might have mentioned Agave syrup, barley malt sweetener, maple syrup, molasses, honey. . .none of which effect the body's glycemic index therefore being much healthier alternatives to both sugar and the artificial sweeteners mentioned on their site.)
It is entirely possible that I am a tad sensitive to the message being delivered here because of my recent brush with death (and diabetic coma) due to an over-appreciation of sugar. (I take full responsibility for this event and the amount of sugar I consumed to create the problem in the first place.) I will say, however, that this reframe rubbed me the wrong way.
Lately many industries have had to do some damage control as a result of bad press (and potentially dangerous products)--the tobacco industry, the dairy industry, the meat industry, the fast food industry, oil and gas industries. . .Our reliance on all of these products isn't doing the environment or our bodies good.
Sugar used to be a luxury item, for special occasions, used sparingly. If you go down the aisles at your supermarket nowadays, you'll see sugar is one of the top ingredients in a huge percentage of the products.
Fortunately for us, (according to www.gonaturalsugar.com), "The sugar in a bag at the store is sucrose, *exactly the same as the sucrose you find in a piece of fresh fruit*. Sugar is not a substitute for fruits and vegetables."
Interesting thing to add. . . 'Sugar is not a substitute for fruits and vegetables.'
At the top of the ironically named "Sugar and a Healthy Lifestyle" page it says, 'Sugar is more than a "fun" food ingredient, it's an essential one you can consume with confidence.'
Is granulated sugar really essential? Hmm. . . I understand only proteins, fats, carbohydrates and vitamins and minerals to be essential. Of course, carbs are technically sugars, but in this context we're led to believe that the we must eat granulated sugar in order to live. While I find this deceptive and fraudulent, I also see it as an incredible reframe of a deadly substance.
Kenrick Cleveland teaches techniques to sell to affluent clients using persuasion strategies. He runs unique public and private seminars and offers home study courses, audio/visual learning tools, and coaching programs in persuasion techniques. Find more free articles at www.MAXpersuasion.com/blog. Be sure to sign up for his free report entitled "Yes! Persuasion."