All About Coffee, William H. Ukers [short story to read .txt] 📗
- Author: William H. Ukers
- Performer: -
Book online «All About Coffee, William H. Ukers [short story to read .txt] 📗». Author William H. Ukers
Soon the handbill copy began to appear in the newspapers, but mostly without the illustrations. Later newspaper developments were to introduce more of the picture element, decorative border, and design. The ideas of European artists were freely drawn upon, but put to so utilitarian uses that their originators would scarce have recognized them.
In the Ladies Home Journal for December, 1888, the Great London Tea Company, Boston, an early mail-order house, advertised, "We have made a specialty since 1877 of giving premiums to those who buy tea and coffee in large quantities." In the same issue, there was an advertisement of Seal Brand and Crusade Brand coffee by Chase & Sanborn, Boston. Dilworth Bros., Pittsburgh, were also among the early users of magazine space.
The menace of the cereal coffee-substitute evil had grown to such proportions at the beginning of the twentieth century, that the coffee men began to be concerned about it. Misleading and untruthful "substitute" copy was freely accepted by nearly all media. The package labels were as bad, if not worse. With the advent of the pure food law of 1906, the cereal label abuse was reformed; but not until the "truth in advertising" movement became a power to be reckoned with, nearly ten years later, were the coffee men granted a substantial measure of protection in the magazines and newspapers. Meanwhile, many coffee men, lacking organization and a knowledge of the facts about coffee, unwittingly played into the hands of the substitute-fakers by publishing unfortunate defensive copy which made confusion worse confounded in the consumer's mind.
(In Colors) of 1872
A ST. LOUIS HANDBILL OF 1854 A ST. LOUIS HANDBILL OF 1854
At one time there were nearly one hundred coffee-substitute concerns engaged in a bitter, untruthful campaign directed against coffee. The most conspicuous offender employed the principle of auto-suggestion and found a goodly number of pseudo-physicians and bright advertising minds that were quite willing to prostitute their finest talents to aid him in attacking an honorable business.
In one year $1,765,000 was spent in traducing the national beverage. The burden of the cereal-faker's song was that coffee was the cause of all the ills that flesh is heir to, and that by stopping its use for ten days and substituting his panacea, these ills would vanish.
Of course, there were many people (but they were the minority) who knew that the caffein content of coffee was a pure, safe stimulant that did not destroy the nerve cells like such false stimulants as alcohol, morphine, etc.; and that while too much could be ingested from abuse of any beverage containing it, nature always effected a cure when the abuse was stopped.
However, there was undoubtedly created in the public mind a suspicion, that threatened to develop into a prejudice, and that affected otherwise sane and normal people, that perhaps coffee was not good for them.
Then came the winter of the coffee men's discontent. Floundering about in a veritable slough of cereal slush, without secure foothold or a true sense of direction, coffee advertising went miserably astray when its writers began to assure the public that their brands were guiltless of the crimes charged in the cereal men's indictment. In this, of course, they unwittingly aided and abetted the cereal fakers. For example, one roaster-packer advertised, "The harmful ingredient in coffee is the tannin-bearing chaff, which our roasting and grinding process completely removes." Scientific research has since proved the fallacy of this idea.
Box-End Sticker, 1833 Box-End Sticker, 1833
Another roaster said, "if coffee works havoc with your nerves and digestion, it is because you are not using a fresh roasted, thoroughly cleaned, correctly cured coffee. Our method of preparing gives you the strength and aroma without its nerve-destroying qualities." A well known coffee packer advertised, "Our coffee is free from the dust and bitter tannin—the only injurious property in coffee." Still another packer informed the consumer that "by a very special steel cutting process" he sliced the coffee beans "so that the little cells containing the volatile oil (the food product) are not broken."
A prominent Chicago packer put out a new brand of coffee which he claimed was "non-intoxicating," "poisonless," and the "only pure coffee." A New Yorker, not to be out-done, brought out a coffee that he said contained all the stimulative properties of the original coffee berries, but with every trace of acid removed, every undesirable element eliminated. "Also," he added for good measure, "this coffee may be used freely without harming the digestive organs or impairing the nervous system."
And one package-coffee man became so exercised over cereal competition that he brought out a grain "coffee" of his own, which he actually advertised as "the nearest approach to coffee ever put on the market, having all the merits without any objectionable features, strengthening without stimulating, satisfying without shattering the nerves."
And so history again repeated itself in America. Five hundred years after the first religious persecution of the drink in Arabia, we find it being persecuted by commercial zealots in the United States. And even in the house of its friends, coffee was being stabbed in the back. The coffee merchants themselves presented the spectacle of "knocking" it by inference and innuendo.
Something had to be done. As cereal drinks, standing on their own feet, the coffee "substitutes" would have attracted little notice. It was only by trading on the allegation that they were substitutes for coffee that they made any headway. The original offender sold his product as "coffee," which was an untruth, as he later admitted there was not a bean of coffee in it. He boldly advertised: "Blank coffee for persons who can't digest ordinary coffee."
When it became no longer possible to perpetrate an untruth on the package label, there still remained the newspapers and billboards. For years before fake-advertising laws and an outraged public opinion made recourse to these no longer possible, it was a common practise to use the newspapers and billboards to promote the idea that here was a different coffee; and in this way to create a demand for a package, which, when purchased, was found to tell a different story.
As printed in Harper's and Scribner's Magazines
As late as 1911, one of our most respected New York dailies was carrying an advertisement calling the product "coffee," although fairness demands it be recorded that the coffee part of the announcement was stricken out when The Tea and Coffee Trade Journal called the attention of the publisher to its misleading character. This trade paper, from its start, had been urging the coffee men to organize for defense. The agitation bore fruit at last, first in the starting of the National Coffee Roasters Association, and later in the inception of the movement that resulted in the international advertising campaign for coffee now in progress in the United States.
Meanwhile, the cereal coffee-substitute had been thoroughly discredited by governmental analysis, although even today newspaper publishers are to be found here and there who are willing to "take a chance" with public opinion and who will admit to their advertising columns such misleading statements for the substitute, as "it has a coffee-like flavor."
Newspaper Copy Used by Chase and Sanborn About 1900 Newspaper Copy Used by Chase and Sanborn About 1900
In the United States today, coffee advertising has reached a high plane of copy excellence. Our coffee advertisers lead all nations. The educational work started by The Tea and Coffee Trade Journal, fostered by the National Coffee Roasters Association, and developed by the Joint Coffee Trade Publicity Committee, has laid low many of the bugaboos raised by the cereal sinners. The coffee men, however, have left considerable room for improvement. There are still some who are given to making exaggerated claims in their publicity, who make reflections upon competitors in a way to destroy public confidence in coffee, and who display an ignorance of, or a lack of confidence in, their product by continuing to claim that their brands do not contain what they assert are injurious or worthless constituents. It is to be hoped that in time these abuses will yield to the further enlightening influence of the trade press, and of the organizations that are continually working for trade betterment.
Before the international coffee campaign started in 1919, the National Coffee Roasters Association promoted two national coffee weeks, one in 1914 and another in 1915, wherein excellent groundwork was done for the big joint coffee trade propaganda that followed. Some original research also was done along lines of proper grinding and correct coffee brewing. A better-coffee-making committee, under the direction of Edward Aborn of New York, rendered yeoman's service to the cause. Much educational work was done in schools and colleges, among newspaper editors, and in the trade. This campaign was the first co-operative publicity for coffee. Among other things, it put a nation-wide emphasis on iced coffee as a delectable summer drink and, for the first time, stressed the correct making of the beverage by drip and filtration methods instead of by boiling, which had long been one of the most crying evils of the business.
Chart Showing Money Spent on Advertising Coffee and Substitutes
Only advertisements printed in magazines and periodicals are considered in making this calculation
Package Coffee Advertising
Coffee advertising began to take on a distinctive character with the introduction of Ariosa by John Arbuckle in 1873. Some of the early publicity for this pioneer package coffee appears typographically crude, judged by modern standards; but the copy itself has all the needful punch, and many of the arguments are just as applicable today as they were a half-century ago. Take the handbill copy illustrated. It was done in three colors, and the argument was new and most convincing. The reverse side copy is also extremely effective. Note the expert-roaster argument and coffee-making directions; some of these may still be found in current coffee advertising.
Most of the original Arbuckle advertising was by means of circulars or broadsides, although some newspaper space was employed. Premiums were first used by John Arbuckle as an advertising sales adjunct, and they proved a big factor in putting Ariosa on the map. Mr. Arbuckle created the kind of word-of-mouth publicity for his goods that is the most difficult achievement in the business of advertising. It caused so deep and lasting an impression, that in some sections it has persisted through at least five decades. The advertising moral is: Get people to talk your brand.
Since the death of its founder, the Arbuckle copy has been changed to fit modern conditions. That it has kept pace with all the forward movements in business and advertising is evident from the specimens which help to illustrate this chapter. A significant change is to be noted in the fact that, for the first time in its history, "the greatest coffee business in the world" has adopted a policy of advertising to the trade as well as to the consumer, thus giving its publicity a well rounded character which it formerly lacked.
The evolution of other notable package coffees is also shown by illustration. Several concerns blazed new trails that have since been picked up and followed by competing brands.
Comments (0)