Burger King Faces Federal Case Over False Advertising Claims

Cheeseburgers with lettuce tomato and sesame seed buns

Federal judge allows lawsuit against Burger King’s “oversized” Whopper advertisements to proceed, raising questions about the fast food industry’s marketing practices and truth in advertising.

Key Insights

A federal judge has permitted a class action lawsuit from 19 customers across 13 states to move forward, alleging Burger King’s advertisements misrepresent the size of its Whopper burger
Plaintiffs claim advertised burgers appear approximately 35% larger and contain double the meat compared to what customers actually receive
U.S. District Judge Roy K. Altman determined the advertisements potentially “go beyond mere exaggeration or puffery,” unlike similar lawsuits against McDonald’s and Wendy’s that were dismissed
Burger King maintains that the claims are false and that they use the same patties in advertisements as they serve to customers

Lawsuit Claims Significant Discrepancy Between Advertised and Actual Burgers

The lawsuit, filed in 2022 by customers from 13 different states, alleges that Burger King’s advertising practices deliberately mislead consumers by displaying burgers substantially larger than what customers receive. According to court documents, the plaintiffs claim advertised Whoppers appear approximately 35% larger and contain more than double the meat compared to the actual product served in restaurants. The complaint includes side-by-side comparisons showing the stark difference between the glossy promotional images and reality.

Judge Roy K. Altman’s decision to allow the case to proceed marks a significant development in consumer protection. Similar lawsuits against McDonald’s and Wendy’s were dismissed in September, but the judge found that Burger King’s advertisements potentially cross the line from acceptable marketing techniques into deceptive practices. The lawsuit specifically highlights how Burger King’s Whopper advertisements have grown increasingly exaggerated since 2017, despite no actual changes to the recipe or ingredients.

Broader Implications for Fast Food Advertising

The lawsuit doesn’t stop with the Whopper. Plaintiffs also allege that other Burger King menu items, including the Impossible Whopper and Bacon King, suffer from similar misrepresentation in advertising materials. These claims raise broader questions about industry-wide marketing practices and whether consumers are routinely being misled about what they can expect when ordering fast food. The distinction between making food look appetizing in advertisements and deliberately exaggerating product size has become central to the case.

Burger King has vigorously denied the allegations, attempting to have the lawsuit dismissed on multiple grounds. A company spokesperson stated that “the plaintiffs’ claims are false,” maintaining that the company uses identical beef patties in both their advertisements and in the restaurants. The fast food chain also defended its marketing approach by explaining that they have simply “styled sandwiches more beautifully” for promotional purposes, a common practice in food advertising.

Consumer Expectations and Industry Practices Under Scrutiny

This case highlights the tension between marketing creativity and consumer protection, calling into question where the line should be drawn in food advertising. While food stylists have long used techniques to make products appear more appetizing in photographs, the lawsuit suggests that Burger King’s advertisements created unreasonable expectations that left customers disappointed with their purchases. Judge Altman found it plausible that reasonable consumers could be deceived by such representations.

Burger King isn’t alone in facing such scrutiny. Subway is currently battling similar allegations regarding the amount of meat in its sandwiches. These cases collectively suggest growing consumer intolerance for perceived misrepresentation in food advertising, potentially forcing fast food companies to reconsider their marketing approaches. As the lawsuit proceeds, it may establish new precedents for truth in advertising standards across the food service industry.