• M137@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    2 days ago

    You Americans just can’t get away from the corporate brainwashing no matter how hard you try.
    “Hershey’s cocoa powder”, what the fuck? Not only is naming a specific brand for a recipe bad enough, naming the worst shit imaginable is so fucking weird.

    • BCsven@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      19 hours ago

      Sometimea it is important like when a recipe wants American jiff or skippy peanut butter etc, because it contains icing sugar besides just peanuts; which changes sugar ratios for cookies.

    • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      23 hours ago

      My guess is that it has to do with the variations from brand to brand and clarifying that this particular recipe used that brand to get the expected taste. Assuming they didn’t enshitify their version with cheaper ingredients.

      Though I hate recipes that say something like “one can” or “one package”. Even without shrinkflation, different brands sometimes use different sizes (if no brand is specified).

      Though if it’s a published recipe, I agree with the other comment saying that money probably exchanged hands, and that deal might even be the only reason that recipe is featured at all, because it was probably a “publish recipes that sell more of our shit” rather than “fit our shit into your recipes where possible”. Guessing the whole thing might have started with “inventory of our cocoa powder is piling up, sales team gets a bonus if they can get it sold (and we’ll lay off the people producing it for a bit)”.

    • LaLuzDelSol@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Typically that just means there was some kind of endorsement deal with the company that made the recipes. I doubt this is an exclusively American phenomenon.