Would you eat "baby food for adults?"
Brands are constantly adapting to our ever-changing world in an effort to stay relevant and viable and, ultimately, make their bottom line. However, sometimes these attempts at gettin’ with the times are so out of touch they miss the mark completely. We call these instances marketing fails.
One such marketing fail happened in 1974, when Gerber—the brand synonymous with baby food—tried, and failed, to rebrand itself as a food for college kids.
As explained by Max Miller of Tasting History, in a short but sweet video (though maybe not as sweet as Gerber’s puréed mango-apple-banana flavor), the ‘70s saw a dramatic decline in marriages and births following the Baby Boom between 1946 and 1964. Less babies, of course, meant less need for baby food, and Gerber was looking for ways to combat a slump in its sales.
Their solution? Rebrand their product as something for college kids.
- YouTube www.youtube.com
Using the logic of “We were good for you then. We’re good for you now,” Gerber rolled out full meals like "Beef Burgundy," "Mediterranean Vegetables," "Ham Casserole," "Creamed Beef," and even "Sweet and Sour Pork” placed in the exact same jars used to contain infant food.
Though the idea itself might have been sound—convenient, all-in-one meals? What busy single person doesn't want that?— the biggest flaw was in the execution. Depressing, or condescending taglines like "Something to eat when you're alone" and "Look at you! All grown up!" didn’t exactly endear young folks to drown out their loneliness with a savory, lukewarm meat mush.
Who doesn't wanna eat beef burgundy right out of the can?Wikimedia
All in all, the failed product went off the shelves within only a few months of its launch. As many viewers pointed out, this very well could have been an idea too ahead of its time, because in today’s fitness-centric world, it could have been a hot ticket item.
“There's a market for meal replacements, both for people with finite time and health buffs,” one person noted.
Another echoed, “Honestly, just put it in a squeeze pack and market it for fitness and those sales will soar.”
Others brought up the fact that the elderly, sick, or, as one person put it it, “the Soylent crowd who hate how the subsistence of their physical body interferes with the grindset,” could have easily bought into the product. But cool college kids? Not so much.
Still, this probably doesn’t go down in history as the most out of touch market schemes. Certainly not in comparison to the infamous Kendall Jenner Pepsi Ad from 2017.
- YouTube www.youtube.com
Or the short-lived Dove Facebook Ad, also from 2017, where a Black woman takes off her shirt to reveal a white woman standing in her place. The idea was to imply that the product was for all women. The interpretation was that it promotes white ideals of beauty. Whoops.
- YouTube www.youtube.com
Or when the American Dairy Association made a translation blunder with their “Got Milk?” campaign, when it wrote “Tienes leche?” for its Spanish-speaking audience. This literally translates to “Are you lactating?”
You could also put the recent Sydney Sweeny American Eagle blue jeans ad in this category. The highly controversial commercial might have boosted web site traffic, but sales? Not so much, according to sites like Adweek and Retail Brew.
- YouTube www.youtube.com
Bottom line: brands ultimately aim to serve themselves, and they do so by trying to tap into the potential emotional triggers of their customer base. We know this, but, let’s face it, even the most scrutinous among us might be swayed by the clever or heartfelt story told in an ad. When they majorly faceplant, however, it’s a lot easier to see their true intentions and a good reminder to take it all with a grain of salt.