retail news in context, analysis with attitude

The Wall Street Journal reports this morning that the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) and the National Consumers League (NCL) have joined together to urge the federal government to mandate liquor companies to put nutritional information on their packages - including alcohol content, serving sizes, calories and ingredients.

And, of course, carbohydrates.

Ironically, except for the fact that many manufacturers would rather not have yet another government mandate to contend with, this may be a quest that falls into the marketing sweet spot for a number of liquor companies.

The WSJ also reports this morning that the success being seen by beer makers in plugging specific products as low-carb is being emulated by makers of vodka, whiskey and other hard liquor products.

The interesting thing is that looks can be deceiving. Guinness, the WSJ reports, actually has fewer carbs than Budweiser, Coors, or Corona. A serving of clear Smirnoff Ice, on the other hand, has about the same number of carbs as "a baked apple pie from McDonald's." And rum, vodka, gin, whisky, and tequila contain no carbs or fat at all.

"People are unaware of the calories and ingredients, and don't know how to compare between types of beverages," CSPI's George Hacker told the WSJ in arguing for the nutrition labels.
KC's View:
Hate the idea of more government regulation, but it's never made sense for liquor to be excluded from the requirement for nutrition labeling.

Do it.

Though we have to admit, when we're choosing between that cabernet and the pinot noir, we're probably not going to be comparing nutrition labels.