"X Flavoured" is accepted terminology for not containing X. For example, sweets can be "fruit flavoured", crips (US/chips) can be "bacon flavoured", with no expectation (either cultural or legal) that they are made using real fruit or bacon.
"Flavoured with White Truffle", on the other hand, would need to use actual white truffle in some way.
I'm not sure that's really the case.
> For example, orange flavoured sweets derive their flavour from real oranges, but orange flavour sweets are synthetically flavoured.
https://www.slough.gov.uk/business/trading-standards/food-st...
How can it be meaningful and legal? Well someone decided to give it a meaning and make it a law (or regulation).
:)
In that case, keeping it kosher widens the market a bit, and the man on the street probably can't tell the difference anyway. Beside that, it's probably cheaper and easier to flavor with smoked paprika than actual bacon.
I have some truffle oil at home and always wondered how it could possibly be profitable to produce; one wouldn't want to squeeze anything out of a truffle. I guess now I have the answer, but I'm not too upset about it. It's probably as close to truffle-flavor as any grocery store in my state will actually get.
Two of my friends on the bus were vegetarian and one said, "oh yea, smoked paprika. That's used in a lot of vegetarian stuff for bacon-type flavour." They then precoded to try some bacon peanuts.
I'm sorry, no. If there weren't a cultural expectation that words have these meanings, they wouldn't feel the need to put it on the label. It's a lie.