KFC has embarked on a new innovation drive – another exercise in the repurposing of ingredients it already has on hand to offer something ‘new’ for its fans. This time it’s a ‘Pizza’ knock-off that really looks more like their legendary Double-Down Dog, which replaced the Bun with Fried Chicken…
Check out the making of the Chizza, above…
It’s called the Chizza. If you want it in Vancouver or Atlanta, or anywhere else in this hemisphere, tell KFC now, via their online presences… But first, lets look at what goes into it. Start with a Butterflied Boneless Chicken Breast, Breaded and Fried in the KFC Way. Top with some Tomato Sauce. Add ‘Chicken’ Ham, Pineapple, Grated Mozzarella and a squirt of KFC’s ‘signature’ Yellow Cheese Sauce.
That’s one big grease bomb, with the Chicken, the ‘Ham’, the Sauce and the Cheeses. And it’s one big Salt Shaker. And I want one right now, for breakfast!
I know, I know…
Anyway, the Chizza has been tested for some time now in the Philippines and Hong Kong, where it apparently went viral. They really, really, love their Fried Chicken in the Philippines! And, now, they’ve taken it to Singapore. I suggest to you that a lovely, crispy Fried Chicken bomb will go over well anywhere in the Asian sphere. One reason is, they seem, to have less concern about Salt and Calories in the mysterious East. And they have strong traditions about their food, too.
The Double-Down Dog came in for a lot of criticism in the West over its dietary implications, in spite of its undeniable natural enticements. The Chizza is all that and more. And, aside from the Fat and Salt issues, there’s also the issue of balance; it’s a lot of protein without any countervailing Veggies. (No: Two tbsp. / 30 ml of Tomato Sauce do not constitute even one serving of Veggies!)
Why delve into the implications?
A dear friend, whose work involves a lot of implication-considering, asked me if I thought it was moral and/or ethical for an global food vendor to sell a product in one market (say, the Philippines) when the product has been declared unhealthy (albeit, unofficially) in another (North America)? I’m focusing specifically on the Chicken-Cutlet-as-Bun phenomenon, common to the Double-Down and the Chizza.
I guess it’s bad business to withhold a popular product from an eager market. But should there be a corporate responsibility to maintain basic standards of healthfulness and wholesomeness in its products, rather than simply playing the regulations compliance game in the various jurisdictions where it operates? Check any major corporation’s Mission Statement. You’ll find a pledge in there to ‘maximize return to the shareholders’. And that need always takes precedence over moral and ethical concerns. Which is especially disappointing when we’re talking about food vendors.
~ Maggie J.