A recent move by Oprah.com to endorse and give away KFC vouchers to United States residents has caused a tiny bit more than a kerfuffle in the chicken coop called the interwebs.
Sensationalist journalists are quick to jump to the obvious gripe that an icon of Oprah's stature really shouldn't be encouraging young people to consume junk food, after all the work she has done to support positive body image perceptions amongst America's youth.
The upshot of the promotion is (they hope) a winning alliance with KFC's new 'Unthink KFC' brand campaign, as the fast food giants make McDonalds-esque moves towards a healthier alternative - in this case grilled chicken as an alternative to the Southern-fried goodness we've come to know and get fat-just-sniffing.
Check out the nutritional panel here. It states there's just 1 gram of saturated fat in pieces other than the thigh, which has 2.5 grams. There's surprisingly no sugar, but there does happen to be a pretty high dosage of the old Harold Holt (err, salt). Franky, I'd be surprised if it were low in everything considered by dieticians to be 'bad'.
So, there are several issues here:
- Should Oprah be promoting KFC, even if they are making moves towards healthier food alternatives?
- If the assumption is that Americans are going to eat it anyway, is KFC doing more or less harm than good by giving chicken away?
- And more relevant to this foodie, what the hell does it taste like?
(image source: Oprah.com and KFC.com)