Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

McDonald’s Universal Icons for 109 Countries [pdf]

enlaso.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 164 posts

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

#21

Post by nicky0 »

vultour wrote: post #4

Don't get me wrong, but I just don't see the point in this. This looks like a pretty in-depth study, why couldn't we use these man hours to create something of actual value? Why does someone care that some people associated an icon with "scary alien"? Just put the icon descriptions somewhere on the page and use circles with a single letter inside for all I care.

> 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.

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

#22

Post by nicky0 »

ArmandGrillet wrote: post #8

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 meaning, with or without printed labels next to them.”

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

#24

Post by jon_richards »

ethagknight wrote: post #17
laretluval wrote: post #3

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

I laughed out loud that they settled on red for protein and green for carbs. Isn't red=stop, green=go more universal?

Green for vegetarian and red for non-veg is pretty universal.

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

#25

Post by thaumasiotes »

ethagknight wrote: post #17
laretluval wrote: post #3

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

I laughed out loud that they settled on red for protein and green for carbs. Isn't red=stop, green=go more universal?

Red=meat, green=plants isn't exactly unintuitive.

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

#27

Post by throwaway91111 »

azinman2 wrote: post #10
incongruity wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can all things be solely and uniquely communicated by an icon? I'd expect not - it's not so different from the collisions you get with TLAs (Three letter acronyms) On the other hand, is an icon set successful if you can see the label once and then keep it straight without labels in the future? I'd say so and I think this work gets close to doing that.

But if we do that then things could look more like the FDA label and just literally repeat the words "fat", "protein," etc but translated into the local language.

err, why would that be desirable? That seems like the worst case scenario, not the best.

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

#28

Post by throwaway91111 »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #25
ethagknight wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I laughed out loud that they settled on red for protein and green for carbs. Isn't red=stop, green=go more universal?

Red=meat, green=plants isn't exactly unintuitive.

My intuition disagrees.

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

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

#29

Post by nicky0 »

johan_larson wrote: post #19
ArmandGrillet wrote: post #8

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.

Ditto. I suspect they could have gotten better international recognition by just using the English words. It would have pissed off the French of course, but that goes in the win column. ;-)

The point was not to get optimal international recognition. Almost the opposite: every symbol should be inoffensive and connote no negative or inappropriate ideas in 108 countries.
Post reply on HN