Tesco Correspondence, Part IV“Blah Blah Blah” 

When Corporate Flattery Replaces Responsibility

In response to the letter featured in the article titled TESCO Part III., I sent the following message to TESCO on January 23, 2026. I have provided the English translation of that letter below.

Dear Tesco,

I ask that, in the future, you express your position with particular care when addressing this extremely sensitive issue that affects so many people.

I felt that, although your response was lengthy, it did not in fact address the questions I raised in any substantive way. Based on your current communication, my impression is that Tesco does not intend to change its existing practices.

Therefore, after 22 months, I would once again like to ask what decision the responsible parties have made in this matter:

• Do you acknowledge that obesity represents a global crisis?

• Do you acknowledge that there are approximately 2.5 billion overweight or obese people on Earth?

• Do you acknowledge that individuals are not solely responsible for obesity?

• Do you acknowledge that the food industry also plays a role in creating this situation, given that for a global population of 8 billion, enough food is produced to feed 13.5 billion people?

• Do you acknowledge that millions of people become ill as a consequence of obesity?

• Do you acknowledge that millions of people die each year from obesity‑related causes?

• Do you acknowledge that neuromarketing practices that encourage excessive purchasing—used by the food retail sector as well—may contribute to the problem?

• Do you acknowledge that without change, the global obesity crisis cannot be contained?

Once again, I ask you to take an active role in alleviating this problem and to review any practices that may endanger customers' health. I trust that, in the future, Tesco will include combating the global obesity crisis among its corporate goals.

I am convinced that any food industry company that takes a pioneering role in this matter could gain a significant competitive advantage and attract many customers away from its competitors. Please do not view my inquiry as criticism, but as an opportunity: you could earn the trust of consumers who want to live healthier lives and lose weight.

My goal is not confrontation, but to work together to help mitigate the global obesity crisis.

I am also convinced that this would not take profit away from Tesco's owners, but quite the opposite: it would create significant added value for them. Consider what a serious marketing advantage it would be if Tesco took the lead in this area and recognized that many of its customers struggle with weight problems.

Please do not treat the fact that your competitors also use neuromarketing tools as an excuse. It is far more worthwhile to think about how you could move ahead of your competitors in this field as well, and gain a real advantage through responsible, transparent practices.

At the same time, I ask that in your future communication you pay particular attention to ensuring that overweight and obese people do not feel they are the targets of disrespectful treatment or misleading messaging. Preserving customers' trust is in all of our interests.

Sincerely, Zoltán Bíró

Tesco's reply – English translation

Dear Zoltán Bíró,

Thank you for your most recent letter.

Regarding the existence of the problems you raised, which affect many people, it might be presumptuous on our part to make a statement of judgment, but we understand your concern for the general well‑being, health, and welfare of the nearly 8 billion people living on Earth as a planet, including our fellow human beings who may be overweight for any reason.

In every country where Tesco operates, we pay special attention to sustainable operations and do everything that can reasonably be expected of us to ensure that our customers are satisfied with their purchases and with the use of Tesco's services. Tesco participates in numerous charitable activities and supports organizations that, within the framework of social responsibility, can provide assistance to our fellow human beings.

We are pleased to see that your commitment to solving the problems you raised in your letter is firm and that you are ready to do everything for a better future and a healthier, more livable environment.

Kind regards, Kinga Customer Service Representative

What Tesco actually said: flattery, self‑praise, and a carefully constructed non‑answer

Tesco's latest response is, on the surface, warm and flattering. They:

• Compliment your commitment ("your commitment… is firm"),
• Express understanding for your concern about "nearly 8 billion people,"
• Highlight their own virtues: sustainability, customer satisfaction, charitable activities, social responsibility.

But notice what is missing: they do not answer a single one of your concrete questions.

You asked eight clear, yes‑or‑no, reality‑based questions:

Is obesity a global crisis?

• Are 2.5 billion people overweight or obese?
• Are individuals not solely responsible?
• Does the food industry play a role?
• Do millions get sick because of obesity?
• Do millions die each year from obesity‑related causes?
• Do neuromarketing practices that push over‑purchasing contribute?
• Is change necessary to slow the crisis?

Tesco's answer to all of this is essentially: 

"It would be presumptuous for us to make a judgment, but we care, we are sustainable, we do charity, and we're glad you're so committed."

That is not a response. That is polished avoidance.

The contrast: global catastrophe vs. corporate self‑congratulation

Here's the core tension:

Reality:

• Around 2.5 billion people are overweight or obese.
• Millions become ill and die every year from obesity‑related causes.
• Food overproduction and aggressive sales tactics are structural drivers, not background noise.
• This is a world‑scale health catastrophe, not a minor "lifestyle issue."

Tesco's narrative in the letter

• "It might be presumptuous to make a statement of judgment."
• "We focus on sustainable operations."
• "We do everything reasonably expected so customers are satisfied."
• "We support charities and social responsibility initiatives."
• "We are pleased by your commitment."

Instead of acknowledging:

• their role as a major food retailer in a system that overproduces and oversells,

• the reality of obesity as a global crisis,

• the possibility that neuromarketing and oversized baskets, carts, and promotions might contribute to overconsumption,

they shift the spotlight onto:

• their own goodness (sustainability, CSR, charity), and

• your goodness (your commitment, your concern).

It's a clever rhetorical move: they wrap the conversation in mutual virtue—"you are committed, we are responsible"—while leaving the structural questions untouched.

"It would be presumptuous to judge": a convenient escape hatch

The key sentence in their reply is this:

"Regarding the existence of the problems you raised… it might be presumptuous on our part to make a statement of judgment…"

This is extraordinary.

You did not ask Tesco to judge individuals. You asked them to acknowledge facts:

• Is obesity a global crisis?

• Are billions affected?

• Are millions dying?

• Does the food system play a role?

Calling it "presumptuous" to comment on this is not humility—it is evasion.

It allows Tesco to:

• avoid taking a position on the scale of the crisis,

• avoid acknowledging any link between their business model and the problem,

• avoid committing to any change in practice.

Meanwhile, the reality is brutally simple: people are not dying from "nothing"—they are dying, in part, from the very products and systems that global food corporations produce, market, and push in ever‑increasing quantities.

Self‑praise in the shadow of a crisis

Tesco's letter spends more words on:

• how responsible they are,

• how sustainable they are,

• how charitable they are,

than on the actual content of your concerns.

This creates a jarring contrast:

On one side:

• a worldwide health disaster,

• billions of people affected,
• millions of deaths,
• structural drivers like overproduction and neuromarketing.

On the other side:

• "We do what is reasonably expected."
• "We support organizations."
• "We care about satisfaction."

It's like standing in front of a burning building and saying:

"We can't really comment on whether there's a fire, but we'd like you to know we recycle and sponsor a local charity."

The gap between the scale of the harm and the tone of self‑congratulation is exactly what makes this response feel so hollow—and, frankly, cynical.

Flattery as a shield

There's another subtle move: they praise you. 

"We are pleased to see that your commitment… is firm and [you are] ready to do everything for a better future…"

This sounds kind, but functionally it does three things:

• Deflects responsibility back onto the individual:

• You are committed.
• You are doing everything you can.

The focus shifts from what Tesco will do to what you are doing.

Softens the tone so that any further criticism can be framed as "ungrateful" or "unreasonable," because they were so "nice" and "supportive."

Occupies space that could have been used to answer your questions with actual substance.

Flattery here is not connection—it's a shield.

The bottom line: "Blah Blah Blah" made polite

• They write in polite, formal, even flattering language.

• They talk about sustainability, charity, and general goodwill.

• They avoid every concrete, measurable, uncomfortable point you raised.

So the message, stripped of its politeness, is:

"We will not acknowledge the scale of the obesity crisis, we will not acknowledge our role in it, we will not commit to changing our practices, but we will tell you we are responsible, sustainable, charitable, and that you are very committed. Blah blah blah."

TESCO and the Myth of “Responsible Colleagues”

TESCO Part II: Hy-Brasil Is Sinking — And They're Still Smiling

TESCO Correspondence, Part III: When a Retail Giant Answers Without Answering

They Took Our Loved Ones From Us — Hold the Food Industry Accountable