List of All Articles with Tag 'k'

Billionaire Elon Musk rebranded Twitter this week and replaced the iconic blue bird logo with a black X, in his latest effort to overhaul the social media giant. The redesign ties in with Musk’s plans to build an “everything” platform –like China’s WeChat or PayTm in India – as he encouraged users to reimagine the “whole concept” of the app formerly known as Twitter. On 24 July, the Tesla founder tweeted a picture of the new logo cast on the Twitter headquarters building in San Francisco, as workers were seen taking down the bird logo that has defined the platform since it was launched in 2006. Musk also redirected the website x.com to twitter.com, and announced that Twitter will soon only be available in dark mode. But it wasn’t an entirely smooth rollout, as it was later revealed Twitter had failed to secure the required permits to change the building signage. Trademark experts also warned Musk could face legal action over his use of X, since rivals Meta and Microsoft both own intellectual property (IP) rights for the letter. The site was reportedly blocked in Indonesia after Mr Musk unveiled the X logo because of the country’s laws on online pornography and gambling. User reactions were also mixed. “The X logo looks like it’s for one of those ridiculous fragile masculinity subscription box services that would send you like an axe, a bottle of hot sauce, small batch coffee, and some beard oil every month in 2019,” one tweet – or is it an X – read. As Twitter moves into a new era, on the heels of a controversial revamp, we look back on seven marketing fails: Royal Mail to Consignia In 2001 the Royal Mail was rebranded as Consignia, but it did not last long. “The new name describes the full scope of what the Post Office does in a way that the words ‘post’ and ‘office’ cannot,” Royal Mail’s then-chief John Roberts unveiled the results of a £2m rebrand, adding that the “modern, meaningful and entirely appropriate” name was suited to the company’s aspirations of becoming an international postal operator. The public did not agree and just 16 months later Consignia was renamed Royal Mail plc, reversing what is considered one of the most disastrous corporate rebranding efforts in recent history. The strategist who led the Consignia rebrand later defended it in an interview with the BBC, explaining why the name was chosen. Keith Wells, who was the director of Dragon Brands, said: “It’s got consign in it. It’s got a link with insignia, so there is this kind of royalty-ish thing in the back of one’s mind. And there’s this lovely dictionary definition of consign which is ‘to entrust to the care of’. That goes right back to sustaining trust, which was very important.” Coke to New Coke “New Coke” remains the benchmark for bad product launches, nearly 40 years after the Coca-Cola company infamously decided to change its secret recipe to gain a competitive advantage over then-up-and-coming Pepsi Co during the cola wars of the Eighties. The decision backfired, as passionate Coke drinkers were devastated by the new taste of the beverage – even launching grassroots campaigns across the United States to bring back the old Coke. “It was the people against the corporation – only in America,” CBS News reporter Bob Simon said in 1985. “Coke said it was committed, so were the people. In California they collected signatures, in Seattle they set up a hotline.” Delighted by their rival’s blunder, Pepsi released an advertisement featuring a girl who asked: “Somebody out there tell me why Coke did it? Why did Coke change?” Coca-Cola eventually buckled under the pressure and announced it would bring back the original taste of Coke, with the company’s then-president saying: “The simple fact is that all of the time and money and skill poured into consumer research on a new Coca-Cola could not measure or reveal the depth and abiding emotional attachment to original Coca-Cola felt by so many people.” Facebook to Meta Mark Zuckerberg’s Facebook became Meta in October 2021 to signal its future as a “metaverse company”. A metaverse is defined as “a digital reality that combines aspects of social media, online gaming, augmented reality (AR), virtual reality (VR), and cryptocurrencies to allow users to interact virtually.” While the tech billionaire insisted the rebrand had nothing to do with the PR crisis during what is now remembered as Meta’s worst year ever. From claims the US Capitol riots were organised on the social media platform to employee-turned-whistleblower Frances Haugen’s allegations, Facebook’s reputation took a severe beating in 2021. And the new name didn’t help. According to a report from The Harris Poll, public trust in Zuckerberg’s company significantly dropped after the announcement that it was going to be known as Meta. PR experts also told Insider Meta would have to do “fundamental work” to win back this trust. PwC to Monday One of the Big Four accounting firms, PricewaterhouseCoopers confusingly changed the name of its consulting arm to Monday in what is widely considered a big branding blunder. “Monday is a new identity on which to build our company’s future, and it will have meaning and stand for something,” the company’s then-CEO Greg Brenneman said, announcing the new name that, apparently, conjures images of “fresh thinking, doughnuts, hot coffee”. However, the brand name was a flop as it failed to capture the essence of PwC’s work, and caused widespread confusion – and derision – from members of the public as well as the press. “The day of the week formerly known as Monday would like to announce its name change to distance itself from PWC Consulting. Forthwith it will be known as Tuesday Eve,” one person quipped. Reporting on PwC’s new name, CNN Money said a spokesperson from Wolff Olins, the agency that led the $110m rebrand, “could not immediately be reached Monday—the day, that is.” The rebrand was eventually rolled back. Hershey’s new logo The well-known chocolate company in 2014 unveiled a logo that resembled a “steaming pile of s***” as the abandoned design continues to amuse TikTok users nine years later. When Hershey’s set about trying to create a fresh and modern interpretation of its beloved Kisses icon, it replaced a photograph of their silver Hershey’s Kiss with an animated, brown version and a gray curlicue to represent its packaging. “The new branding will impact all visual aspects of how The Hershey Company presents itself,” the company said in a statement at the time, “from consumer communications to websites to the interior design of its office spaces and the look of its retail stores.” Amused customers were quick to point out the logo had ended up looking like a poop emoji instead, an unsavoury association to make with a chocolate brand. @zacharywinterton Once you see it you cant unsee it. This design is proof that not all logos are created equal ? #logodesign #designfail ♬ original sound - Zachary Winterton Sunny Delight The orange soft beverage launched in the UK in 1998 was once considered a threat to Pepsi and Coke. However, a poorly-timed advertisement amid regulatory scrutiny brought grey storms for Sunny Delight, as the drinks sales fell from a record high of £160m to a measly £6.8m by 2010. The Food Commission launched a campaign against Sunny Delight, claiming it was bad for children after it was reported that one child in Wales turned yellow from drinking 1.5 litres of the drink. “This is excessive consumption and consumption on that scale would lead to a yellowing of the skin because of the beta carotene, in the same way as drinking too much carrot juice or orange juice would,” a spokeswoman for the company said at the time. The girl’s condition, caused by betacarotene which gives the drink it’s colour, emerged at the same time as Sunny Delight was running an ad campaign featuring a pair of snowmen turning orange. Consequently, the popularity of Sunny Delight reportedly halved, as consumers lost their appetite for the bright yellow, sweet drink. Cardiff City’s football kit In 2012, the club’s then-new owner gave the kit an ill-conceived makeover. He decided to put the team, nicknamed the Bluebirds, in a red kit and changed the logo from a blue bird to a red Welsh dragon. “The change of colour is a radical and some would say revolutionary move which will be met with unease and apprehension by a number of supporters, along with being seen as controversial by many,” ex-chief executive Alan Whiteley said. “To those I would like to say that this was not a decision that has been taken lightly or without a great deal of thought and debate. Fans retaliated and the blue kit was restored, with approval from the club’s owner Vincent Tan. Read More Sinead O’Connor latest: Singer moved to London ‘to feel less lonely’ after son’s death, neighbours say England vs Denmark LIVE: Women’s World Cup result and reaction as Lionesses win but Walsh injured Man in debt after driving motorhome through London’s low emission zone First British passports issued in King’s name unveiled Royal Mail wins contract for collection and delivery of passports Mapped: Ten worst UK hotspots for dog attacks on postal workers

Amber Husain was cooking dinner for a friend when she suddenly realised the meat she was preparing was a corpse. She looked at the chicken in front of her and was overcome with a visceral sense of disgust. Instead of food, she saw “a carcass – plucked, beheaded, and fleshy”. Husain was 26 when she had this epiphany, and it served as a wake-up call not just for her stomach but her mind, too – as her personal tastes shifted away from meat products, her political outlook on the meat industry and food production more broadly also altered and expanded. Five years later, that moment of revulsion forms the opening of her new book, Meat Love, in which she scrutinises the idea of “ethical” meat consumption, and dares to ask how the contemporary middle classes have come to criticise “the worst violence against animals” while still happily feeding on their flesh. Why, for example, has well-heeled, middle-class London gone nuts for slurping bone marrow from the shin bones of baby cows? Why is offal on so many trendy menus? How has contemporary culture at large come to accept that factory farms are monstrous, but that if animals are cared for, cherished and loved while alive, we should feel better about killing them for our carnivorous pleasures? “For ages, I was one of those carnivores who felt mildly bad about eating meat but just turned that into this inane, self-consciously sadistic part of the pleasure of it all,” Husein tells me. “The more my diet started to revolve around stuff that wasn’t meat, the weirder meat started to feel. Interestingly, once my stomach had been radicalised, I found I had a much greater intellectual openness to thinking about the politics of meat.” Having freed herself from the conflict of eating meat but also feeling bad about it, she found she was able to go beyond those questions of morality – which she suggests can be “stifling” – and think politically. “Now that I have no desire to eat animals, there’s nothing to stop me reckoning with what it means that the meat industry [consists of] an underclass of both humans and animals who are exploited and – in the animals’ case – killed for pleasure and profit.” This is the essential crux of Husain’s argument, and it’s something often lacking in discussions around the “ethics” of meat consumption. For Husain, the question is not, “how can humans eat meat responsibly?” but “how are certain lives devalued to an extent that their suffering can be written off, in order to ‘make a killing’?” What she’s saying, in other words, is that whether the meat on the table has come from a factory farm or an organic farm, or whether you’re tucking in at Burger King or the River Cafe, the path to the plate is still paved with violence. And, while current cultural trends may claim it is better to love and respect an animal before killing and consuming it, perhaps what this cultivates is the ability to embrace exploitation “in a spirit of virtuous indulgence”. What does it really mean, for all living beings, if love is imagined as compatible with killing? “To slide your buttery hand between the flesh and skin of a thing that, if only for a moment, you have re-learnt to perceive as a corpse, is to give an invigorating massage to your sense of political possibility,” Husain writes in Meat Love. By the slim book’s end, her invigorated “sense of political possibility” has led to “a ravenous hunger – a desire for a different culture, a different society”; a new world “in which no one, neither animal, immigrant, worker, woman, or peasant, was considered a thing to be owned, controlled, killed, or left to die”. For many, the leap from a chicken breast on a plate to the exploitation of oppressed people around the globe might seem like a vast one. Yet, it certainly seems clear that there has been a marked shift in the way meat is conceived and consumed – among the middle classes, at least. Since the turn of the millennium, foodie figures like Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall have been promoting “seasonal, ethically produced food” as part of a broader commitment to caring for the environment. At the same time, a distinctly carnivorous spirit has taken hold – one that professes to be an “honest”, “grounded” and “down to earth” ethos. “Good food, good eating, is all about blood and organs, cruelty and decay,” Anthony Bourdain wrote at the start of the 1999 New Yorker article that would, eventually, catapult him into global foodie fame. I find it easy to laugh at Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall and people like that, but I’m not totally convinced that they’re really the bad guys Lewis Bassett Then there’s Fergus Henderson and St John – the illustrious London restaurant, born in 1994 on the premises of a former bacon smokehouse, which popularised “nose to tail” dining. This offal-centric “no waste” approach is neatly summed up in Henderson’s oft-quoted phrase: “If you’re going to kill the animal, it seems only polite to use the whole thing.” Traditionally “cheap cuts” are “elevated” from a source of sustenance for the working classes, to a source of virtue for the urban bourgeois. According to its own cookbook, St John dishes combine “high sophistication with peasant roughness” – that winning aesthetic formula that also sees middle-class urbanites flocking to farmers’ markets and chugging natural wine. In a sharp and searing piece for food and culture newsletter Vittles, writer Sheena Patel dubs this “Rich Person Peasantcore”, asking: “Why are these influencers pretending that they themselves till the land and eat like 17th-century French peasants when in fact their chopping boards cost more than most people’s rent?” In the face of swathes of small plates adorned with offal, and slices of ham served for upwards of £20, it seems like a pertinent question not just for influencers, but also for today’s trendiest restaurateurs and diners. Lewis Bassett is a chef and the host of The Full English podcast, which, over its two seasons, has dived into everything from the birth of “modern European” cuisine to high food prices, factory farms, and why Britain is in love with Greggs. “It’s interesting the way we create these fantastical worlds for us to eat within,” he says. “It is clearly a fantasy to imagine that you can have the rural experience of a peasant in France or Italy, in modern-day Britain.” Yet, he also says that this trend is far from new. The current “rustic” style – typified by “nose to tail eating” – is, he suggests, “intimately tied with what you could call a culinary and broader cultural movement that appears in the wake of countercultural movements in the Sixties, and eventually finds its way into food, especially as some of those countercultural people get a bit older and a bit more affluence”. Essentially, “it’s the same thing that manifested in places like Habitat,” he says, of the homewares and furnishings brand founded in 1964 by Terence Conran. Both design and dining were transformed, offering experiences to the middle classes that were both refined and casual at the same time. Alongside that cultural shift, and “that fashion for pared-down forms of eating out”, Bassett notes the arrival of a broader awareness of environmental and animal welfare concerns. “It’s obviously easy to ridicule these middle-class forms of culture,” he says, “but these concerns are ones I certainly share and I think should be considerations for everyone. I find it easy to laugh at Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall and people like that, but I’m not totally convinced that they’re really the bad guys.” So is there a danger that legitimate backlash to the “thrifty rural”, “nose to tail” trend – and bourgeois “peasantcore” more broadly – could spill over into an attack on all food industry attempts at sustainability? “I think people don’t want stuffy fine dining experiences,” Bassett says, “but at the same time, having the kind of pared-down, rustic, ‘peasant food’ – like, having ham served to you at St John costs you 20 quid – maybe people are slightly sick of that.” He quickly adds, though, that he is “not saying it can come any cheaper than 20 quid, because when you spend a lot of time and effort rearing animals properly, and paying chefs properly, and paying rents in your restaurants, that racks up”. It seems there is a tension, then, between practical and immediate ethical matters – such as paying food industry staff liveable wages or reducing food waste – and broader questions about what kind of society we wish to live in or create. Is the question of “ethical” meat consumption, as Husain suggested, “beyond morality” – a question of politics only? Or is it still, at heart, a moral dilemma, based on people’s personal sense of “right” and “wrong”? Summing up Husain’s attitude towards animals in Meat Love, Bassett suggests “she’s saying that, if you love them so much, why are you killing them? I suppose where Amber Husain and I would slightly disagree is that I’m not convinced that killing an animal is inherently wrong.” Away from the carnal appreciation and “peasantcore” of contemporary restaurant culture, meat-eating often seems to be conceived as either a “guilty pleasure” or a “grim necessity”. In all these cases, however, there appears to be an overriding sense that there is “no alternative” to a meat-eating status quo. The late cultural critic Mark Fisher famously used similar terms to define “capitalist realism”, meaning that capitalism is the only viable economic system, and thus there can be no imaginable alternative. Is it possible we’re also stuck in a kind of “carnivorous realism”? If so, it might be because the two are so interlinked. As Husain puts it, “meat is the inevitable outcome of an economic system that relies on cheap labour and cheap life. But that doesn’t mean meat is a necessity, it means a new economic order is a necessity.” Perhaps taking the leap from a vegetarian diet to full-scale social and economic revolution still seems unthinkable to many. But, in nasty, brutish and austere times, it has also perhaps never been more necessary to seriously consider who can eat, and who is made meat. “I think we need an avalanche of political will from within the food justice, land justice, climate justice and labour movements to radically transform society,” Husain says. With that as the goal, she believes it isn’t helpful “for us to be clinging to the idea of meat as a pleasure”: “If we can’t imagine something other than animal flesh to eat for dinner we might struggle to imagine an entirely different society.” ‘Meat Love: An Ideology of the Flesh’ by Amber Husain is out now Read More Between Brexit and Covid, London’s food scene has become a dog’s dinner – can it be saved? It’s time for booze bottles to have health warning labels Should I give up Diet Coke? With aspartame under suspicion, an addict speaks Food portion sizes on packaging are ‘unrealistic and confusing’, says Which? In Horto: Hearty, outdoorsy fare in a secret London Bridge garden Zero-fuss cooking: BBQ pork ribs and zingy Asian slaw

How rule changes and financial independence is helping unmarried women to keep their babies.

Hello, it’s been a scorching week, both literally and in markets. Here’s something to help you catch up

It's that time of year again: the thick of summer when sharks have caught America's attention.

In an era where work from home and hybrid work scenarios are increasingly common, one

By his early twenties, Pan Gongsheng’s ambition had already propelled him from a farming village in eastern China

Sudha Murty's life has been under increased scrutiny since son-in-law Rishi Sunak became PM of Britain.

The price of the chicken wing is going up, and that may spell trouble for Wingstop Inc., according

Strong demand from consumers willing to pay up for bookings pushed Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. shares to the

MEXICO CITY Mexican distiller Becle, the world's largest tequila producer, said on Friday that it maintained its guidance

Portion information on food packaging is too “confusing, inconsistent or unrealistic” for people to get a clear understanding of how much sugar, fat and salt they are consuming, according to new research. Which? surveyed more than 1,200 people on portion sizes and found that a large number of people could not estimate correctly how many servings popular supermarket foods contained. The consumer champion found that respondents often assumed portions were larger than the suggested serving sizes listed on the packaging, and labelled the latter “small” and “unrealistic”. For example, more than half of respondents thought a 225g pack of halloumi would cover two to four servings, but the package information suggests it should feed seven. More than a third of respondents thought a tub of Pringles contained two to four portions, but the packaging suggests it contains six to seven servings of around 13 crisps per person. The majority (79 per cent) of those who took part in the survey thought a supermarket meal deal was designed to serve one person, given they are typically purchased for a single person’s meal. However, Which? pointed out that while the sandwich is usually for one person, the drink and snack that are usually included in the deal may be designed for two. The research also found inconsistencies in portion sizes across pack sizes for popular products. Walkers Ready Salted Crisps come in three different individual pack sizes ranging from 25g per pack in a multipack to 45g in a grab bag, but these all count as one portion. Meanwhile, a 150g sharing bag suggests that a single portion is 30g. Other products that have similar inconsistencies include Cadbury’s Dairy Milk, which have recommended serving sizes ranging from 20g to 33.5g. Which? also found inconsistencies in serving size suggestions depending on the brand, even if the amount of product in a package is similar. A 300g back of Dell Ugo tomato and mozzarella tortellini states that it serves two people, but a near-identical version by Marks & Spencer that also weighs 300g says it contains three servings. Respondents also found it difficult to estimate an appropriate portion size for drinks, it was revealed, after 229 people were asked to pour themselves a glass of wine, juice or smoothie and measure how much they served themselves. Just under half (49 per cent) of white wine drinkers poured themselves more than the recommended 125ml, with the largest pour recorded rising to more than double that (275ml). Among red wine drinkers, almost two thirds (69 per cent) poured a much larger portion, which the largest pour reaching 250ml. More than half (54 per cent) of those who drank orange juice served themselves more than the recommended 150ml, with the largest pour measuring in at 400ml. Orange juice packages show the amount of calories and sugar in a 150ml serving, which is around 62 calories and 13g of sugar. However, a 400ml glass has 166 calories and 35g of sugar, more free sugar than an adult should have in a day according to the NHS. Which? said: “Although traffic light labelling is a useful guide to the nutritional value, for it to be effective it must be based on realistic portion sizes. Manufacturers and supermarkets should look to make improvements and provide clearer labelling on serving sizes so shoppers are not misled about the food they buy.” Customers are also advised to check packaging and to measure portion sizes at home to get a clearer idea of what they should consume looks like according to the packaging suggestions. Shefalee Loth, a nutritionist at Which?, said: “Which? found people can be confused by inconsistent and unrealistic serving sizes and that the way that manufacturers provide these can sometimes make it difficult to assess just how healthy a product is. “Nutrition labelling is really valuable for consumers, including front of pack traffic light labelling, but it needs to be based on meaningful and consistent portion sizes.” Read More Men have a problem – and it won’t be solved by either Andrew Tate or Caitlin Moran Elon Musk reacts to ex-wife Talulah Riley’s engagement to Thomas Brodie-Sangster Thomas Brodie-Sangster references Love Actually in sweet engagement announcement with Talulah Riley In Horto: Hearty, outdoorsy fare in a secret London Bridge garden Zero-fuss cooking: BBQ pork ribs and zingy Asian slaw Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie ‘set to try and resolve’ longrunning vineyard dispute