Live data from Hacker News

McDonald’s Universal Icons for 109 Countries [pdf]

enlaso.com

51–60 of 164 posts

Re: McDonald’s Universal Icons for 109 Countries [pdf]

#51
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Relevant line from TFA: > Some colors were changed because nutritionist feedback identified red with protein, yellow with fat and green with energy. Red, I understand. Muscle fibre (what protein builds, in most people's minds) is red. Yellow is fat because fat is , itself—in large enough amounts—a light yellow color. Butter, margarine, liposuction ejecta... etc. Energy, though, is a bit hard to deduce. Notice that th…

It's a gas gauge? I thought it was a weight scale, as in "eating lots of carbs makes you gain weight".

I had to work through it by a process of elimination, like a Sudoku puzzle: the "fat" symbol is definitely evoking "tape measure around the waist" iconography, perhaps implying (falsely) that "fat is the thing that makes you fat"—but more likely just putting people in mind of their weight and then saying "yeah, that stuff, that's what's in this."

Given that, it'd be redundant for the carbs icon to also be about weight. It's a meter of some sort, though. To me, it's either temperature—or pressure in a storage tank. Temperature would somewhat make sense, in the idea that carbs are the simplest thing that the body burns, and eating more carbs literally makes you hotter. But there are more common icons for temperatue (e.g. an old mercury thermometer with the teardrop base), so it's probably not temperature. Pressure it is.

Given that the referent is carbs, what would the storage tank be filled with? Probably a liquid. Liquid sugar? Sugar isn't green. What's a green liquid? Most hydrocarbons. Hydrocarbons are like carbohydrates, and serve many of the same functions for machines that carbs do for humans.

What's a common hydrocarbon pressure gauge? A car's gas gauge.

Re: McDonald’s Universal Icons for 109 Countries [pdf]

#52

I don't see a good explanation here about why they need to have a universal set of icons. If they allowed a greater quantity of icons that work better for each region, why wouldn't this simply be better?

Saves money in the long run. Having gone through the process of ordering package prints I can say for sure that single run prints of packaging at scale is much cheaper than 100 variants. When you're operating at the level of McDonalds everything, no matter how minuscule, becomes something to be optimized.

Re: McDonald’s Universal Icons for 109 Countries [pdf]

#53
post #22

Except for calories, I would not be able to understand what means the information on nutrient icons without having the corresponding word next to it.

From TFA: > “We realize that some of the visuals may not already be strongly linked in consumer minds to the nutrient they are meant to depict in all markets.” > “We intend to promote understanding of the images through supporting materials in Europe, from web sites to images explained on tray liners and via in-store displays,” ... > “After repeated exposure to these images, customers should eventually grasp their me…

After repeated exposure to these words, customers should eventually grasp their meaning, with or without printed translations next to them.

Re: McDonald’s Universal Icons for 109 Countries [pdf]

#54
post #39
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Don't get me wrong, but I just don't see the point in this. This is probably why you aren't running a massively successful multinational company.

You're insane if you think a bunch of icons on the back side of tray-covering paper are the reason for McDonald's success. They would've got very similar effect by using single letters in a circle - they're not offensive and would suggest as much to their actual meaning as a bunch of abstract icons.

You're insane if you think a bunch of icons on the back side of tray-covering paper are the reason for McDonald's success.

Nobody claimed that.

Re: McDonald’s Universal Icons for 109 Countries [pdf]

#55
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From TFA: > “We realize that some of the visuals may not already be strongly linked in consumer minds to the nutrient they are meant to depict in all markets.” > “We intend to promote understanding of the images through supporting materials in Europe, from web sites to images explained on tray liners and via in-store displays,” ... > “After repeated exposure to these images, customers should eventually grasp their me…

After repeated exposure to these words, customers should eventually grasp their meaning, with or without printed translations next to them.

Yeah -- think about a lot of commonly accepted icons, like for nuclear radiation or biohazards. Or even the weird icons like those for "pause" and "record" on media devices -- these aren't intuitive icons, we've just gotten used to them.

Re: McDonald’s Universal Icons for 109 Countries [pdf]

#57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My intuition disagrees. Besides, what on earth do carbs have to do with vegetables? If anything, i would expect bread to fill that role.

Bread is made from grass seeds.

So is grain alcohol. That does not make it plant matter. Both are so far removed from "plants" that the association with it's original components is effectively meaningless. Bread is not a plant product, it is its own thing: a bread product.

Re: McDonald’s Universal Icons for 109 Countries [pdf]

#58

McDonalds has a clear conflict of interest in the design of these icons for nutrition information.

> McDonalds has a clear conflict of interest in the design of these icons for nutrition information. I could understand the point if they'd created McDonald's-specific units (e.g 10 grams of sugar = 1 McVigor). But they're just icons for info that McDonald's makes no effort to hide. Care to elaborate?

Not GP, but using a weight scale for fat and a fuel gauge for carbs, suggests that fat makes you fat while carbs give you energy. This thinking, enshrined in the FDA food pyramid, led to the modern epidemic of obesity and diabetes.

Re: McDonald’s Universal Icons for 109 Countries [pdf]

#59
post #22

Except for calories, I would not be able to understand what means the information on nutrient icons without having the corresponding word next to it.

From TFA: > “We realize that some of the visuals may not already be strongly linked in consumer minds to the nutrient they are meant to depict in all markets.” > “We intend to promote understanding of the images through supporting materials in Europe, from web sites to images explained on tray liners and via in-store displays,” ... > “After repeated exposure to these images, customers should eventually grasp their me…

What I found most interesting was not the rather meaningless icon choices, but the incredibly deceptive dotted line seen on page 12. It's basically anchoring people in a meaningless way such that not everything seems bad.

Without the line it's like 50% more sodium relative to the number of calories I am eating. That's terrible. With the line ehh, I guess everything looks ok.

Re: McDonald’s Universal Icons for 109 Countries [pdf]

#60
post #56

This is painful. Fat, why not a bucket of lard? Salt, why not a salt shaker??? These icons are incomprehensible for the educated and the uneducated mind alike.

A bucket of lard? Is lard stored or served in buckets? We buy lard in blocks where I live. I can imagine drawing a bucket but how do you convey the lard part of it? Maybe buckets of lard aren't as universal as you think they are and McDonalds already knows this.
Post reply on HN