"reasonable consumer" is a correct and usable phrase in written English.
It can be used when referring to a hypothetical consumer who would act reasonably in a given situation. This term is often used in legal and marketing contexts. Example: According to consumer protection laws, companies must provide accurate and truthful information to a reasonable consumer when advertising their products.
Starbucks says a "reasonable consumer" would not have been misled.
He ruled that "a reasonable consumer would not be deceived into believing that the product in the instant case contained a fruit that does not exist".
Preparing or disseminating a false or deceptive review that a reasonable consumer would believe to be a neutral third-party review is a form of false advertising known as "astroturfing," and it violates several New York laws.
If true, consumers who eat at McDonald's have not been given a free choice, and thus liability may attach.... Plaintiffs argue that McDonald's products have been so altered that their unhealthy attributes are now outside the ken of the average reasonable consumer.
One round of laughter was prompted when Judge Chin asked, "Do you think that the reasonable consumer, seeing the word 'lies' over Mr. O'Reilly's face would believe Mr. O'Reilly is endorsing this book?" The giggling continued as Dori Ann Hanswirth, a lawyer for Fox, replied, "To me, it's quite ambiguous as to what the message is here".
This begs the question; are the more relaxed guidelines for television disclosure also created for that reasonable consumer?
This sounds like a reasonable, consumer-protecting rule: if you're reading a rave write-up of a product on a blog (or anywhere else, of course), you probably want to know whether the product maker paid the person writing it, in money or goods.
In the agreed-upon settlement, it's reiterated that Square denies all the allegations "and took the position that the use of the term 'gratuity' was neither misleading to reasonable consumers nor unlawful.
As more ad formats grow, this will be an even stronger focus on this, with disclosures being required so that a "significant minority of reasonable consumers" do not get misled.
"The fruit snacks' ingredients list cannot be used to correct the message that reasonable consumers may take from the rest of the packaging: that the fruit snacks are made with a particular type and quantity of fruit".
Reasonable consumers might be misled by packaging that claimed the snacks are "made with real fruit," and would not read the fine print, U.S. District Judge Samuel Conti in San Francisco said on Thursday.
