Why Your McD's Burger Doesn't Look Like the One in the Ad
1–10 of 195 posts
Re: Why Your McD's Burger Doesn't Look Like the One in the Ad
#2It used to be annoying that the food looks so different, but after that video ... I feel better ... and hungry. Some good communication there from the McMarketing Department
Re: Why Your McD's Burger Doesn't Look Like the One in the Ad
#3to be honest in the UK at least they look pretty similar although usually assembled slightly wonky.
Still taste as good as they look in the ads though.
Despite all the bad press, McDonalds is great (well I like them anyway).
Re: Why Your McD's Burger Doesn't Look Like the One in the Ad
#4This is clever (if cynical) marketing from McDonalds Canada: take one of the oldest knocks against large-scale fast food (that's it's marketed dishonestly) and turn it into a product benefit: "it's ugly because we took the original product, which is beautiful, and then uglified it to make it taste better". One thing that makes this piece cynical is that the integrity of fast food promo graphics is not a new or pressing issue; McDonalds has had many excellent opportunities to address that critique in the past.
Also, note carefully the details in this piece: it covers "food styling" done by "WATT" for "McDonalds Canada" and claims that that particular shoot used only the actual ingredients McDonalds uses in its retail chain.
From what little I know of the "food styling" business (not much, but I've met people who work in it), it would be an extraordinary claim that McDonalds adheres to that "only real store-scale ingredients used in promotional graphics" credo worldwide. But maybe they do?
Re: Why Your McD's Burger Doesn't Look Like the One in the Ad
#5Direct Youtube link:
Re: Why Your McD's Burger Doesn't Look Like the One in the Ad
#6This is clever (if cynical) marketing from McDonalds Canada: take one of the oldest knocks against large-scale fast food (that's it's marketed dishonestly) and turn it into a product benefit: "it's ugly because we took the original product, which is beautiful, and then uglified it to make it taste better". One thing that makes this piece cynical is that the integrity of fast food promo graphics is not a new or pressi…
I understand there are specific laws about what they can and cannot show in a food ad in Ontario and/or Canada. They can do their own preparation, but I believe the ingredients must be identical to the ones in the actual product. So it must be an actual beef patty, and the ketchup and mustard can be squirted on carefully, but they have to be real ketchup and mustard.
Re: Why Your McD's Burger Doesn't Look Like the One in the Ad
#7This is clever (if cynical) marketing from McDonalds Canada: take one of the oldest knocks against large-scale fast food (that's it's marketed dishonestly) and turn it into a product benefit: "it's ugly because we took the original product, which is beautiful, and then uglified it to make it taste better". One thing that makes this piece cynical is that the integrity of fast food promo graphics is not a new or pressi…
I was always under the impression that most food photography was not just using different ingredients, but that they were actually using inedible materials (paint, glue, clay, etc.) on/for the food in the pictures.
Re: Why Your McD's Burger Doesn't Look Like the One in the Ad
#8I've never had a huge issue with the difference in appearance. One was assembled by a stylist, the other by a teenager putting together 200 of them in a shift. As long as what I asked for is in there, and what I didn't ask for isn't, and it's generally piled vertically, I'm good. Nice bit of PR on McD's part though... this is very seldom directly addressed by the food industry.
Now to find lunch...
Re: Why Your McD's Burger Doesn't Look Like the One in the Ad
#9This is clever (if cynical) marketing from McDonalds Canada: take one of the oldest knocks against large-scale fast food (that's it's marketed dishonestly) and turn it into a product benefit: "it's ugly because we took the original product, which is beautiful, and then uglified it to make it taste better". One thing that makes this piece cynical is that the integrity of fast food promo graphics is not a new or pressi…
In the US, they have to by law... if the photo is advertising an actual product. For instance, they could garnish the photo with a basket of fresh tomatoes, a head of lettuce, a friendly cow, etc. and that would be okay... as long as the actual product being sold is made using the as-sold ingredients.
This law came about in, hm, the 60s? after the first wave of outrage over things like ice cream in advertisements being made out of textured lard, or whatever.
Re: Why Your McD's Burger Doesn't Look Like the One in the Ad
#10This is clever (if cynical) marketing from McDonalds Canada: take one of the oldest knocks against large-scale fast food (that's it's marketed dishonestly) and turn it into a product benefit: "it's ugly because we took the original product, which is beautiful, and then uglified it to make it taste better". One thing that makes this piece cynical is that the integrity of fast food promo graphics is not a new or pressi…
I was always under the impression that most food photography was not just using different ingredients, but that they were actually using inedible materials (paint, glue, clay, etc.) on/for the food in the pictures.
Likewise, and from talking to food stylists, not just from reading about it. Again: totally possible McD doesn't do that anywhere.