Deux Ex Machinatio wrote, in part,
OK, somebody tell me if I'm missing the boat here, but... since when is 340 calories a completely unacceptable amount to eat for a meal? Ignore the underlying message that all women should be on a restricted-calorie diet. That's just too big for me to tackle right now. This is a matter of degree and simple math. Note that Campbell's isn't in any way playing these ads in the light of "eat our soup for lunch so you can have that cheesecake later." I'd be a lot more OK with that, even though it still buys into the problematic social imperative for all women to restrict their food intake. But no, the message implicit in that ad is that 340 calories is simply too much to eat, ever.
Philosophyerin agreed! But her "DTM" was only the beginning.
Ouch! Wanting to eat more than 60 calories per meal certainly is extreme. Since philosophyerin didn't actually tag Campbell's in her tweet, someone at the soup giant must be trawling Twitter for critics. But philosophyerin wasn't going down without a fight.
She responded thus, and ...
We couldn't have said it better ourselves. But we were curious about what other Twitter conversations Campbell's might have seen fit to get into.
Scanning CampbellSoupCo's feed, we noted this reply. So what did jenomaha do to get Campbell's attention?
Somebody at Campbell's has a lot of time on their hands.
Earlier: No Soup For You