Famous Death Row Last Meals
Riz au Lait: The Frenchman's Ultimate Comfort Food
Photo: Ben+Sam, Flickr
Last week, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) -- which regulates U.S. advertising -- announced a class-action settlement brought to the century-old, $13 billion company in the U.S. District Court of California, thanks to the laws of advertising that ban misleading and inaccurate marketing claims (or what we like to call the "That just ain't right!" ruling).
For the Mini-Wheats case, settled in November of last year, Kellogg's agreed to $10.5 million. According to Food Business News, "class members received $2.75 million and $5.5 million was given to charities." For the Krispies Immunity boxes, Kellogg's will pay you, the customer, between $5 and $15 for any you bought while they were on the shelf from June 1, 2009 to March 1, 2010, which accounts for $2.5 million. The company is also charged to destroy these boxes and donate $2.5 million worth of products and brand cereals to charity.
We hear ya, Kellogg's; sometimes fiction reads better than fact, but the front of the box has to agree with the nutrition facts on the back.
Become a fan of Slashfood on Facebook and follow us Twitter.
12 Common Workout Myths Debunked
Forbidden America: Cold War-Era Map Shows No-Go Zones For Soviet Tourists
Powerball Jackpot Winning Ticket Purchased In Florida
Tenants: Stench of Death Makes St. Louis Complex 'Unlivable'
Chili's Waitress Fired Over Facebook Post Insulting 'Stupid Cops'
Courtney Stodden Has A Sex Tape
2013 Billboard Music Awards: All the Winners!
2013 Billboard Music Awards: Arrivals Photos From the Blue Carpet!
River Lost 150 Pounds: 'There Is Hope. Grab Onto It'
Ricardo Cerezo, Facing Eviction, Finds $4.85 Million Lottery Ticket
Man Takes Dump In Background Of Instructional Workout Video
LOOK: Dolphins Make Rare Underwater Find
MIT's cheetah robot runs faster, more efficiently, can carry its own power supply (video)
Forever 21 Worker Fired After She Tells Her Traumatic Story
PHOTOS:Eva Longoria's Almost Wardrobe Malfunction At Cannes
2013 Billboard Music Awards Best and Worst Dressed
How Kidnapping Suspect Passes Time Behind Bars
Radio Host Makes Shocking Claim About Shooting Hillary Clinton
Police Investigate Student Shooting Death
Obama Approval Rating Not Hurt By Scandals
These American Companies Refused To Sign The Bangladesh Safety Accord
All The Pics: Jessica Ennis Marries Andy Hill
Mom Thought Family Was Being Stalked By 'Demonic Presences': Cops
Winning Powerball Numbers
LOOK: National Geographic's Stunning Photo Contest
Suspected PayPal Hackers Seek Deal To Stay Out Of Prison
Do Kimye's Baby Shower Invitations Reveal Something?
The Worst Job Interview Mistakes
You Can Blame Hipsters For That $7 Bud Light
PHOTOS: Aishwarya Rai's Cannes Style Evolution
Guess Which State Boasts The Most Million-Dollar Homes?
Former OJ Attorney Gives Shocking Testimony
1-19-2011 @8:01AM Fathertimema said... Anyone who has children are not to bright. We all know not to believe any thing a company has to say about their product. If you got con its your own fault!!
Reply
1-19-2011 @10:10AM chris said... I could not disagree more. You somehow are blaming gullibility of the consumer to justify false advertising and down right corporate lying on a grand scale? If grandiose claims in advertising are proved false, then these companies SHOULD pay fines large enough to discourage a repeat. Too small a fine would simply put it in a business decision to continue to deceive the public and pay the fine as long as you made more money with the lie than pay out in fines. We should do what we can to keep the marketplace as honest as possible, or we degrade into economic chaos.
1-19-2011 @10:07AM tony said... well i have a science degree from yale,i have a three year old son and i make 75,000 a year,now whos not too bright? oh yeah and i can spell.
1-19-2011 @10:28AM Kat said... Fathertimema does that include your mama?
1-19-2011 @10:42AM Stonepony said... Hope you don't have children...looks like you're not "to" bright either.
1-20-2011 @11:06AM l1a1h1 said... Okay, brainy, here it is...It's "not too bright" not "not to bright", it's "anything" not "any thing", it's "conned" not "con", and it's "it's" not "its". Thank-you in advance for not contributing to the ignorance of any other bloganderthals.
1-19-2011 @3:24PM Al Schrader said... Tony - I went to a better school than Yale. I can actually start sentences with capitals, punctuate correctly, and capitalize "I". I also have a particle being researched in Geneva, Switzerland in the CERN Large Hadron Collider and it's me verses Einstein. I graduated from BCC in Cocoa, Florida....Alfred-
1-19-2011 @8:08AM LISA said... The front of the box said that it "helps" support your immunity....."helps" and with the vitamins and minerals in the cereal, I'm sure it does even if just a little. As for the frosted mini wheats, yes with all of the sugar on them, I am sure it does make kids more alert. It may be far fetched but true is true. These law suits are ridiculous. Common sense tells you that NOTHING with that much sugar is good for you!!!!!Now I guess you can get sued for OTHERS not having common sense.
Reply
1-19-2011 @2:15PM Ben said... Any vitamins were already in it. The point was, the deceptive advertising was a scare tactic after the flu broke out. As for sugar, it not only does NOT make kids more alert, it makes them less alert. A "Sugar high", is very short lived, after that, the 'crash' when they sit and stare and get called 'bad kids' because they don't pay attention. You are very misinformed about the world you live in.
1-19-2011 @3:16PM lstucky said... Well then they might as well say, "Helps improve your life span", since if you don't eat you will die. I'm sick of this happening everywhere. Snake oil advertising is making a comeback, I'm glad they got sued. And on TV they can pretty much say anything they want in advertising as long as they have a tiny disclaimer at the bottom in words so small they can hardly even be read on a 56" HDTV.
1-19-2011 @2:31PM Lisa to Ben said... Was it a scare tactic or was it coincedence that these statements happened to print when they did. Prove to me that it was a scare tactic! Also, we all know that after the sugar rush comes a crash but they are NOT claiming that there is NO crash, only that kids will be more alert! I am very informed about the world I live in. Most of these companies just pay out to not have to deal with the hassel of court. NOW KELLOGGS WILL RAISE THEIR PRICES AND WE WILL ALL HAVE TO PAY FOR THIS STUPID LAWSUIT! BOY GLAD YOU ARE NOT WORKING FOR MY FIRM BEN!!!
1-19-2011 @8:17AM Cro-Mag said... The problem with common sense...it's not that common.
Reply
1-19-2011 @8:21AM Mike said... Just curious.... how much did the lawyers get.... ad how much will make it's way to the consumers?
Reply
1-19-2011 @9:02AM boonymedic said... Good point.
1-19-2011 @9:15AM Maddie.Denver said... I have no doubt the laywers made out, but I would like to know who gets the rest and how?????
1-19-2011 @2:37PM LISA said... Don't you people read???? You must read more than the caption!!! I won't waste my time going over it. Read it yourself, it's all there!!!!
1-19-2011 @9:01AM BTDT said... Rice Krispies is a wonderful product. What made them feel they had to lie to sell it?
Reply
1-19-2011 @9:12AM wakeupamerica said... GREED!!!!!!!!
Reply
1-19-2011 @9:26AM rw said... looks like someone should drug test DR ann , she looks coked up or something . sounds like a dumb thing to fine a company for after all people shouldnt believe any of these food companies after all they are here to sell thier products .
Reply
1-19-2011 @12:11PM eyesxshut said... LOL! I don't think she's coked up, if anything she is HIGH AS A KITE!
She can't stop talking about how AWESOME cereal is. Someone's got the munchies... xD