McDonald’s – the brand the world loves to hate

January 9, 2012

Just lovin’ it? You may be, but you can bet they aren’t. No matter how hard it tries, the world’s biggest restaurant chain by revenue simply can’t strike the appropriate note in its advertising campaigns. In place of plaudits, it invariably earns brickbats.

Now why is that I wonder? Well it’s not the calibre of its marketing people that is the problem. Compared with most global corporations, and certainly most international retailers, McDonald’s puts great store by talent. It attracts people like Jill McDonald, UK CEO and a shoo-in Marketer of the Year in most annual polls. Again against the grain, McDonald’s believes in advertising creativity. Can you remember who does Wal-Mart’s advertising? Neither can I. But I do recall that McDonald’s has retained, in turn, Leo Burnett and DDB.

Here’s DDB’s latest US offering. It’s an apparently inoffensive slice of life campaign, featuring farmers who supply McDonald’s with their beef, potatoes and lettuces. It won’t win any creative prizes, but it’s professionally produced and does a job in stressing an increasingly important element in consumer decision-making: the integrity of provenance.

Pulse and respiration still normal? I’m surprised. Because these ads have created near apoplexy in the USA. Apparently, it’s not what they say (which appears to be accurate enough) but what they leave out that should shock us to the marrow. By means of soft, bucolic imagery, McDonald’s has fooled us into believing it is part of a “farm to fork” movement transporting wholesome vegetables and prime beef cuts directly to our local fast-food outlet. Whilst – wouldn’t you just know it – skilfully omitting all mention of the wicked middle-man who, by perverted alchemy, buys up all this wholesome produce and slices and dices it into the fatty fries and bloating burgers that we more naturally associate with McDonald’s. A case not so much of Golden Arches as Arch Hypocrite.

Far be it from me to defend the fast-food industry, but isn’t this criticism a little harsh? Not, it seems, when the ad campaign emanates from The Great Satan – seducer of little children, agent of obesity and chief representative of all that is most reprehensible about international capitalism.

Given such an unsavoury reputation, you might think McDonald’s on safer ground with this lightly amusing piece of comparative advertising, which pokes fun at its rival Burger King. Small boy in a playground despairs of ever tasting his beloved McD Fries because they always end up being filched by his bigger brethren. Then he hits upon a novel and successful stratagem: hide them behind a BK bag, and nobody will ever want to eat them –

The ad – not unreasonably – won a bronze in the recent Epica Awards. But maybe because it was produced in Germany, it also created a major sense of humour loss, which resulted in humiliating retraction:

“McDonald’s has broken the rules of comparative advertising by degrading the Burger King brand in the TV commercial ‘Packaging.’ McDonald’s and Burger King have agreed that [the spot's] distribution and broadcast … will be stopped,” said a statement from Burger King.

Apparently, the agencies responsible for the ad, Tribal DDB and Heye & Partners, had put it out on the web without seeking permission from their client. It has since attracted hundreds of thousands of viewers on YouTube.

At least McDonald’s is popular with someone.

About these ads

Supermarkets face ‘greenwash’ crisis over disappearance of Amazonian rainforest

August 5, 2009

DeforestationProblems with the Brazilian Leather Supply Chain sounds a riveting subject for some obscure PhD thesis. You know the sort of thing: A Reassessment of 8th-Century Scandinavian Boat-Building Techniques.

In fact, far from being academic, it’s a subject of passionate interest to some of the world’s leading shoe brands: Nike, Adidas, Timberland and Clarks among them. That’s because they fear a catastrophic boycott of their products if they’re not more vigilant about the leather supply chain.

Their unease stems from an undercover investigation by Greenpeace which has all-too-credibly revealed that leading Brazilian suppliers of leather and beef for products sold in Britain are sourcing their cattle from ranches involved in the clearance of the Amazonian rainforest.

Clearing tropical forests for agriculture produces an estimated 17% of world carbon emissions. According to Brazil’s environment minister, Carlos Minc, up to 75% of deforestation is caused by ranching.

The footwear companies have been a lot more alert to the ramifications of this problem than UK supermarkets. They are asking for an immediate moratorium on rainforest destruction, whereas the supermarkets are still complacent about their alleged involvement.

The real issue is this.  Brand-owners may cleanse their own supply lines, demanding assurance from suppliers that no ‘dirty’ cattle are involved. But it’s a bit like analysing securitised sub-prime mortgage debt. The good gets mixed in with the bad, and no one’s any the wiser because rigorous scrutiny is almost impossible. Even if the brand-owner’s supply line is ‘clean’, that’s no guarantee the same supplier will not provide third parties with ‘dirty’ goods. Which means guilt by association. Wal-Mart and Carrefour have shown the way forward by threatening to fire any suppliers who continue to do business with ranches involved in rainforest clearance.


Will Wal-Mart price-war shatter Windows?

July 27, 2009

imagesWal-Mart, judged by its sales, would be the 18th largest economy in the world. So, when the global retailer decides to do something, it usually moves markets.

Right now, analysts are pondering what impact its decision to stimulate a price-war in the laptop sector will have on personal computer manufacturers reeling from recession.

The PC community, largely represented by Microsoft, which produces Windows operating software, Intel, the chip-maker, and Hewlett-Packard and Dell, which manufacture the computers, is already under siege from an influx of low-cost, lightweight netbooks, mostly hailing from Taiwanese manufacturers such as Acer and Asustek.

If Wal-Mart carries out its threat of selling an HP laptop running Windows Vista with 3 gigabytes of memory and a 160-gigabyte hard drive for under $300 (£182), then that spells trouble indeed for PC margins. Mighty Microsoft, for example, has just reported a loss in its quarterly financial results – its first consecutive loss ever. And that’s before the Wal-Mart price promotion kicks in.

Believe it or not, the Wal-Mart threat and recession may only be mooncast shadows compared with another problem rocking the PC business. More in this week’s magazine column.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 416 other followers

%d bloggers like this: