Which of the following is NOT a consequence of a foodborne illness outbreak?

In the context of a foodborne illness outbreak, the correct response highlights that increased customer loyalty is not a typical consequence. In fact, outbreaks tend to result in significant losses for food establishments, including customer trust and loyalty. When an outbreak occurs, customers often become wary of the establishment involved, leading them to seek alternatives for their dining experiences.

On the other hand, negative media coverage, lawsuits, and loss of reputation are all direct repercussions of a foodborne illness outbreak. Negative media coverage can amplify the public's awareness of the issue, further damaging the establishment's image. Lawsuits and legal fees arise from affected customers seeking compensation, which can lead to significant financial burdens. Additionally, the loss of reputation can take a long time to recover from, as past incidents may haunt the establishment, affecting future business. Hence, the idea that an outbreak could somehow foster increased customer loyalty is not aligned with the realities faced by food establishments in such situations.