What does 'designed in Canada' label even mean? 'It's insincere and an effort to mislead and manipulate,' expert says
As Canadian shoppers commit to boycotting U.S. products amid the ongoing tariff war, some are raising their eyebrows at some tactics companies are using to appear more Canadian than they actually are.
Reddit user MrIceCap (Canadian, much?!) posted a photo of a can of Campbell's soup on the popular "Loblaws Is Out of Control" group. The label states it is "designed in Canada," while just centimetres below, it states it is a "product of the U.S.A."
So, what gives? In an e-mail statement, a representative from Campbell's says 'Designed in Canada' describes a product that is created based on Canadian taste preferences, insights or recipes, and may contain Canadian ingredients, but is made elsewhere. They note that the label has been on their products since 2018.
While the company once had a manufacturing plant in Toronto, it shuttered in 2018. Campbell's does still have a Canadian office, located in the Greater Toronto Area.
Still, experts say this type of marketing in the current political climate is bound to be confusing.
'It doesn't mean anything really,' says Sylvain Charlebois, director of the Agri-Food Analytics Lab at Dalhousie University. 'The origin of the product comes from Canada.'
He notes that Habitant soup, a company that originated in Quebec also has 'Designed in Canada' labeling. It was acquired by Campbell's in 1989, but is now manufactured in the U.S.
Another good question. The 'Designed in Canada' label indicates that the product was developed in Canada but may now be manufactured in the U.S. Traditional Habitant soup is a good example. pic.twitter.com/WbSNy8NQyh
— The Food Professor (@FoodProfessor) February 6, 2025
'It means it was created in Canada but was manufactured in the U.S. or elsewhere using foreign ingredients as well,' he says.
Markus Giesler is a professor of marketing at York University. He says 'Designed in Canada' is the least regulated of all designations of product marketing, describing the tactic as 'reaching' and a 'poor attempt at making a product as Canadian when it's not.'
'It just means that a part of the product was designed in Canada,' he says. 'The design process, the engineering, the artistic design, the styling of either the product or the labeling. That is Canadian. The products and the ingredients came from other parts of the world.'
He says companies are using this type of marketing to capitalize on patriotism on products that aren't even Canadian.
'Maybe they had a Canadian graphic designer, or photographer, or software engineer that contributed to this product,' he says. 'It's not about the product. It's insincere and an effort to mislead and manipulate.'
It's not about the product. It's insincere and an effort to mislead and manipulate.
The label of 'Designed in Canada' isn't unheard of in the marketing of known Canadian clothing brands, like lululemon or Aritizia, despite being manufactured abroad, Giesler says. He adds that other brands like mattress company Endy, jewelry company Mejuri and clothing retailer Frank and Oak have recently been magnifying the fact that they're Canadian companies, as patriotism spikes, despite manufacturing their products outside of Canada.
On its website, the Competition Bureau says a product that is making 'Made in Canada' claims must have accurate and truthful identification of country of origin and accurately reflect the production or activity that took place in Canada on labelling or marketing claims. If the product doesn't meet the criteria, it must use more specific terms to describe the process that took place in Canada, like 'Assembled in Canada' or 'Designed in Canada.'
Between November 1, 2024 and March 31, 2025, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency received a total of 64 complaints related to country of origin claims on food labels or in advertisements, including some related to "Product of Canada."
Consumers are encouraged to report any products believed to be mislabelled to the CFIA through their food complaint or concern web page.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bloomberg
35 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Canada Firms Double Use of Government Program to Retain Workers Amid Tariffs
A Canadian government program that aims to minimize layoffs by providing benefits to workers who agree to work fewer hours has seen its uptake double in about half a year. As of June 8, there were 799 so-called work-sharing agreements with employers in Canada, up from 399 in November, according to government data shared with Bloomberg News.
Yahoo
41 minutes ago
- Yahoo
5 Retirement Contingency Plans Gen Z Can Start Working on Now
No one wants to spend their 20s or 30s thinking about what could go wrong decades from now. But if there's one thing we can learn from what boomers and Gen X are dealing with, it's that retirement doesn't always go as planned. Some older Americans spent decades saving diligently, only to watch the market tank right as they were ready to retire. And others were even forced to delay retirement altogether due to a variety of factors, like inflation and medical costs. Read Next: Check Out: But don't worry. If you're still young, you have plenty of time to do things differently. Here are a few smart (and not-so-obvious) retirement contingency plans Gen Z can start working on now. Your investments could be on track for years, and then suddenly crash 30% because of one global crisis. And though the stock market has always recovered eventually after major crashes in the past, the recovery time can take months or years. So if you don't want to be so dependent on your portfolio, consider investing in a high-income skill that can help you make money regardless of how the economy is doing, like content creation, coding or freelance photography. That way, you won't feel forced to pull money out of your retirement account at a loss if you know you can earn a few thousand a month on the side. Learn More: Retiring in a high-cost U.S. city can be difficult if you don't have much in your nest egg. If you'd rather have financial breathing room than stress about covering rent in a big city, consider moving abroad or downsizing. Even though you might not be retiring soon, you can start researching alternative retirement destinations now. That could mean scoping out low-cost cities in the U.S., learning about countries with digital nomad or retirement visas, joining Facebook groups or Reddit threads where expats share real numbers and experiences, learning about what it means to downsize, or calculating how much you'll need to retire comfortably, depending on your desired living situation. The idea of never working again sounds nice until you realize how long retirement can last, and how expensive healthcare, housing and just living can be. If you don't mind continuing to work after 65, semi-retirement can be a plan that works better for you than fully retiring. That can mean working seasonally or part-time doing something you enjoy, taking a few years off and returning to work later, or taking mini-retirements throughout your life instead of saving it all for the end. What makes semi-retirement worth considering is that it gives you more control and lets you stay financially afloat even if the markets don't cooperate. Even the most 'safe' investments can take a hit when the economy gets shaky. Stocks go through bear markets. Bonds lose value when interest rates spike. Real estate markets can crash. In other words, there's no such thing as a totally risk-free investment. That's why you should never put all your eggs in one basket when it comes to investing for retirement. So if you haven't already, work with a financial planner to help you create a mix of assets that can support you no matter what the market's doing. You'll also want to diversify your income streams so you can keep growing your retirement fund even if you lose your main source of income. You can have a diversified investment portfolio, a fully loaded retirement account and a six-figure income, but if you're still carrying high-interest debt into your 50s and 60s, it can drag down everything you've worked for. Especially in retirement, when you're no longer earning a full-time income, debt payments can feel heavier than ever. If you focus on paying off high-interest credit cards and minimizing lifestyle inflation in your 20s and 30s, you free up money that can go toward savings, investing or building the kind of flexibility you'll need later. It also makes it easier to retire on your own terms, without being tied to monthly payments that limit your options. More From GOBankingRates Mark Cuban Warns of 'Red Rural Recession' -- 4 States That Could Get Hit Hard Mark Cuban Tells Americans To Stock Up on Consumables as Trump's Tariffs Hit -- Here's What To Buy I'm a Retired Boomer: 6 Bills I Canceled This Year That Were a Waste of Money This article originally appeared on 5 Retirement Contingency Plans Gen Z Can Start Working on Now Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Supreme Court of Canada to hear appeal in long-running Facebook privacy case
OTTAWA — The Supreme Court of Canada has agreed to review a ruling that concluded Facebook broke federal privacy law by failing to adequately inform users of risks to their data when using the popular social media platform. Last September, the Federal Court of Appeal found Facebook, now known as Meta Platforms, did not obtain the meaningful consent required by the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act between 2013 and 2015. The decision overturned a 2023 Federal Court ruling. The Court of Appeal said Facebook invited millions of apps onto its platform and did not adequately supervise them. It found that the Federal Court's failure to engage with the relevant evidence on this point was an error of law. Privacy commissioner Philippe Dufresne called the Court of Appeal decision an acknowledgment that international firms whose business models rely on users' data must respect Canadian privacy law. Facebook applied for a hearing at the Supreme Court, arguing the Court of Appeal took the wrong approach to consent and security safeguards under the privacy law. It said in a written application that, rather than evaluating Facebook's multi-layered efforts to obtain meaningful consent, the Court of Appeal focused myopically on the platform's privacy policy alone. The Supreme Court, following its usual practice, gave no reasons Thursday for agreeing to hear the case. A 2019 investigation report from then-federal privacy commissioner Daniel Therrien and his British Columbia counterpart cited major shortcomings in Facebook's procedures and called for stronger laws to protect Canadians. The probe followed reports that Facebook let an outside organization use a digital app to access users' personal information, which was then passed to others. The app, at one point known as "This is Your Digital Life," encouraged users to complete a personality quiz but collected information about the people who installed the app and data about their Facebook friends. Recipients of the information included the British consulting firm Cambridge Analytica, which was involved in U.S. political campaigns and targeted messaging. About 300,000 Facebook users worldwide added the app, leading to the potential disclosure of the personal information of approximately 87 million others, including more than 600,000 Canadians, the commissioners' report said. The commissioners concluded that Facebook violated PIPEDA by failing to obtain valid and meaningful consent from installing users and their friends, and that it had "inadequate safeguards" to protect user information. Facebook disputed the investigation's findings. The company has said it tried to work with the privacy commissioner's office and take measures that would go above and beyond what other companies do. In early 2020, Therrien asked the Federal Court to declare Facebook had violated the law. A judge ruled the commissioner failed to establish that Facebook breached the law on meaningful consent. He also agreed with Facebook's argument that once a user authorizes it to disclose information to an app, the social media company's safeguarding duties under PIPEDA come to an end. In its decision, the Court of Appeal noted Facebook's contention that users read privacy policies presented to them when they sign up to social networking websites — something the judges called "a dubious assumption" given such documents can run to thousands of words. "Terms that are on their face superficially clear do not necessarily translate into meaningful consent," Justice Donald Rennie wrote for a three-member panel. "Apparent clarity can be lost or obscured in the length and miasma of the document and the complexity of its terms." In this case, Rennie said, a central question was whether a reasonable person "would have understood that in downloading a personality quiz (or any app), they were consenting to the risk that the app would scrape their data and the data of their friends, to be used in a manner contrary to Facebook's own internal rules (i.e. sold to a corporation to develop metrics to target advertising in advance of the 2016 U.S. election)." This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 12, 2025. Jim Bronskill, The Canadian Press Sign in to access your portfolio
