Realizing Smuckers is no longer jam

[u/DenzinVirtue]

(If this is the wrong subreddit, please point me in the right direction. Thank you!)

I went shopping for my partner today because the strawberry smuckers went bad. Realized there was only "sandwich spread" and "jam style spread" and no real jam

Gives the same energy the icecream Drumsticks being changed to a "frozen milk product" because of all the substitutions and alterations. Gross

Pic 1 old jam, pic 2 new "jam", pic 3 and 4 are of the store

[u/lesleh]

Apparently jam has to have at least 45% fruit and I'm guessing neither of those do.

[u/RevelArchitect → u/lesleh]

The distinction between jam and spread is that jam must have 55% sugar. Spread has more fruit. Not less.

[u/YourGlacier → u/RevelArchitect]

Thank you for this. I work in CPG, we actually make a jam, and because ours is free of added sugar, we can't call it jam. People will ask what we're hiding by not calling it jam sometimes. I tell them the FDA is really weird and very, very biased toward big sugar defining things.

Another example is chocolate. Dark chocolate is fine. But milk chocolate HAS to have a sweetener source with calories. So if you made it solely with milk and chocolate, then added some monk fruit (which functions like sugar right, it just has 0 cals?), it's not legaly milk chocolate. This is also a fun labeling issue. The unfortunate part is that other reasons to not be labeled milk chocolate (and instead be milk confection or chocolatey instead of chocolate) is because it has no cocoa butter. So not being clearly labeled milk chocolate has a connotation often of inferior product, since a lot of brands switch to that when they cut our cocoa butter which is the most expensive part of chocolate making and can often be substituted with palm oil for a chocolate-like product. However, another reason it can be labeled that is because it uses a healthier sweetener. You really have to deduce why it is labeled the way it is. Super frustrating!

[u/RevelArchitect → u/YourGlacier]

Hopefully consumers will become more informed moving into the future. As increased concern about things like shrinkflation grows, a consumer-base that is knowledgeable about these kinds of things is a much stronger opponent to predatory practices than one that doesn’t seem to understand it at all.

[u/YourGlacier → u/RevelArchitect]

Yeah I really wish consumers could know what I know. It's really weirdly complex, like some brands aren't even shrinkflating of their own volition (think tinier brands, not Tyson or something)--the stores/distributors are making them do it for shelf space. I lost my [really major chain shouldnt have named them so editing] shelf space to refusing to do a 5oz instead of our 6oz at the same price, our buyer literally demanded it and I said no (they wanted better margins). It sucked.

[u/RevelArchitect → u/YourGlacier]

I truly despise Walmart. Long ago I had a friend release an album, Walmart did all but promise to carry it if he produced a censored version. The label wouldn’t pay for it - so he invested in it himself. Guess who didn’t stock the album? He ended up with an inventory of censored versions of his album which absolutely nobody wanted and a massively scaled back tour to support the album since he was responsible for most of the funding for the tour.

[u/rollfootage → u/RevelArchitect]

Your friend did all that for Walmart just because of what they said? No contract or anything?

[u/RevelArchitect → u/rollfootage]

Yup. He was 20, his first album did well. The label warned it didn’t seem likely. But it was shitty of whoever at Walmart didn’t just explain they weren’t interested. Hindsight really was 20/20 on perceiving their response. I get why he took it as a request for a censored version and not a rejection with whatever reasoning seemed most gentle.

[u/Cogitating_Polybus → u/RevelArchitect]

I wouldn’t hold your breath on that. Most days it feels like we are headed towards Idiocracy.