For the past decade, Clean Label has dominated the food industry and now every company is focusing on having its premium product, “clean”. What does “clean” even mean? Generally, the numerical-based nutrition facts that look nice or the ingredient deck is short, or the ingredient deck has simple words.

Some people have done an amazing job capitalizing this trend such as sparkling water, RXBar, and That’s It while others, mainly legacy brands that try to jump on it have generally fallen flat. Generally, a completely new brand should take the reigns but big companies can get around it. How? By creating new brands within the company with no association with the legacy company.

But that’s not the point of this article. Clean-washing, a play on words from Green-washing is a serious problem because it throws a wrench in science communication. Though there will always be a company that will exploit it, and wins, it can also backfire and cause a massive fallout. Whether you choose to go the clean-washing route or suck it up and use transparent science is up to you, so here are some strategies to really focus down on the messaging on your product.

Where We Are Now

Generally, when you look at the history of food technology such as ice cream, protein bars, and soda,  you can see that when first introduced, no one gives a crap about what’s in the label. Instead, there is a general wow factor, and it tastes amazing. As competitors see the hype, they will copy the product, and eventually, competitors will try to differentiate themselves. Some will actually use technology, some will use marketing tactics, and some will just insult their competitors for doing it wrong. Overall, this is a baby-step type of innovation and is only designed to capture or revitalize market share.

Lightlife recently took a huge stand saying they don’t use the stuff Beyond Meat and Impossible Foods uses and therefore considers themselves a superior product. The industry bit back with a series of well-known and respected plant-based entrepreneurs and investors pretty much saying that Lightlife is not only harming the industry by being blatantly divisive but that their product is not that different.

So if you look at Lightlife formula, they call out 8 ingredients which includes pea protein, canola oil, beet powder, garlic powder, coconut oil. They don’t call out using natural flavors, cane sugar, vinegar, natural flavors and modified cellulose (which is methylcellulose, the only thing that works in plant-based burgers). Though it’d be fine and dandy if Lightlife’s formula had an innovative, defensible technology, they don’t. Any food technologist can see right through it and realize that their formula is probably pretty close to Beyond and Impossible and they probably use the same stuff.

But food technologists aren’t the target. It’s the average consumer. So I wanted to wait to do an analysis until I saw the general reaction to this on Facebook via ads to see if it actually resonated with their consumers. Sometimes, we’re so in the weeds that we can be disconnected to the target market.

Whoever is running their Facebook ads is probably getting 2 hours of sleep. The comments are brutal and unfocused.

I’m paraphrasing the quotes, but this is generally what I see. Here’s the link to see for yourself.

People who like it

Your hot dogs are ok, I tried your sausages but like Beyond much better. I’m all for any food that is plant based though and am thrilled to see so many more being offered

People who hate it

Instead of slamming other companies who are trying to make a difference for the animals, you might try just telling people why your products are good. This campaign is awful and I will never buy any of your products.

Oof, this is not a good look, quit attacking other plant-based companies, especially on a platform of anti-science fear-mongering…

My burgers contain 100% cow……

You are hurting your business with this campaign.

Still a highly processed food. Not much different from the others

So… Anti-intellectualism? Is that your ad platform? Are you saying I shouldn’t eat things with too many syllables? “Too many ingredients,” what madness is this? Are unseasoned potatoes better for you than seasoned potatoes, now? Everything about this ad campaign screams “My product does not taste good, and I am insecure about that.”

Eat meat. Its better for you, and provides you with vital materials that plants do not. If you have small children DO NOT put them on a vegan diet. You will damage their growth and possibly their health. Check out what pediatricians say. Kids need the fats and saturated fats that meats provide

As you can see, the comments are varied ranging from rabid meat eaters, to people who don’t like processed foods, to people who think that attacking their competitors is a low blow.

There is some glimmer of hope from Lightlife that the stressed out analyst will pick out: One comment from another ad I can’t find said that she is glad there is a non-soy alternative. Another said that she would eat this because Impossible does animal testing and she’s not about that.

If Lightlife can capitalize on those values, they might be able to come out ahead, but how big really is this market? Are they really the people who buy plant-based meat? The issue with legacy companies is that they only care about ROI and how much money they can capitalize on a fiery trend.

Taste over Label

In all of the examples I’ve ever seen, the number one product always wins on taste. Taste overcomes pretty much anything when it comes to trying something new. When people taste something new, and they say “wow” generally, they won’t say “will I die if I eat this?”. Of course, the people with allergies and sensitivities will say it first, but those shouldn’t be the people you’re targeting if you’re smart.

Smart marketers and smart formulators will focus on taste and then work around the marketing language. A schism in both camps generally ends up with an inferior product.

Smart marketers will also agree that improving is better than backtracking. They are the same thing in a formulation sense. Saying we have a “Version 1” is better than saying “we took out this because the trends say otherwise.” A version 1 shows inclusiveness and that you iterate based on customer feedback than a white paper. If a product tastes amazing and you have a “bad ingredient”, then it might be easier to say “we hear you, we are working on a version without it”

The Inevitable Next Wave

I’ve had three instances where there are articles about clean label plant-based meat or friends talking about clean label plant-based meat. It is inevitable that the products that will come out next are going to be subjectively healthier and cleaner because the label says so and the consumer doesn’t know.

When you slap on soy concentrate as the first ingredient, it could be a powder, or textured vegetable protein, or a meat analog that gets spat out by an extruder but only the food scientists will know. And the food scientists chuckle that the marketing concept of calling it clean works even though soy protein is pretty darn processed. Wheat such as seitan is minimally processed, as it only takes a water wash to get it but people freak out because it’s made out of gluten.

The world works in funny ways and though I do believe that it is inevitable that young, exciting people are creating the next generation of plant-based meat that tastes better and is healthier for certain people and if you communicate wrong, the product will fall flat. As someone who’s built a plant-based meat company, a weird personal brand, and works in probably the most well-branded B2B plant-ingredient startup, here are my suggestions for new players:

• Start small and focused: Ironically, bootstrappers are more suited for this because funding psychologically pressures you. Find someone who loves your product, understand who they are, and start creating a tribe of followers.
• Taste is king: Data on this is biased because people can think before answering. Most people buy things because it’s either indulgent or convenient and then, later on, think about secondary effects such as ethics, sustainability, and clean label. Tasting is a lightning-fast reaction and the more memorable and addictive the experience, the better. Aim for this, and recognize that if the taste experience overcomes the label experience, find ways to justify your label. You can always change your product.
• Minimize PR: When we started Better Meat Co, we didn’t have much PR. Now they do. What does that mean? I won’t get into it. There’s a time and a place for it. PR is an amplifier, but without a good base, the wrong people will find it, and bash on your product.

I am not bashing clean label practices as it’s inevitable that these will be the next wave of plant-based meat but there is a smart way and a dumb way to communicate it. It is a fact that more people understand where our food comes from. They are not naive and they will do their research. Whether that research is legitimate or not, is a whole other problem but I digress. There are people who definitively will never eat plant-based meat (both carnivores and herbivores), people who praise the science and the people who praise its healthiness. We live in a world where there’s something for everyone and it’s your product’s job to find its owner.