So a woman is suing McDonald's because she says that the toys they include with their happy meals are making her kids want to eat at McDonald's all the time and they won't listen to her when she says no.
This is a great situation to discuss PR in the real world.
Let's take a logical approach to this. If this woman has a problem saying no to her kids, and her kids don't listen to her when she says no and harass her to say yes, it would seem to me that her problem is not McDonald's but rather the parental relationship she has with her kids. Perhaps she needs to learn some new techniques for asserting an authoritative (not authoritarian mind you) style that her kids respond to.
But can McDonald's come out and say something like that? Can they come out and say 'Hey, it's not our fault that your kids harass you, maybe you should look at your parenting technique instead of blaming us for their behavior. It's just a 25-cent plastic toy for heaven sake. What do you want us to do, make it so kids don't enjoy coming to McDonald's?"
Of course they can't say this because they would risk offending other parents, who expect businesses to respond to all parental concerns with the utmost attention (even if the concerns are silly and even if other parents don't share those concerns). When it comes to anything kid-related, the public is prone to working itself in to a hysteria (after all, we have to protect kids).
So from a PR perspective, what can McDonald's do? This story has hit the major media outlets, so what now?
Well, they've done the right thing... they've stood their ground with a very reasoned response.
McDonald's says it is proud of its Happy Meals and will vigorously defend the company's brand, its reputation and its food. "We stand on our 30-year track record of providing a fun experience for kids and families at McDonald's," said Bridget Coffing, a company spokesperson. "We listen to our customers, and parents consistently tell us they approve of our Happy Meals. We are confident that parents understand and appreciate that Happy Meals are a fun treat, with quality, right-sized food choices for their children that can fit into a balanced diet."
Sometimes in PR you don't need to launch a major rebuttal. Sometimes you just have to address the issue and then let it fade away.
Their response was perfect in that they could have easily upset other parents by dismissing the concerns being brought forward by this mother. But by integrating all parents into their response, by emphasizing that parental feedback and concerns is how they shape their business, they are able to negate the worry of upsetting other parents in their response.
While your average Joe reading their response might think it's just an off-the-cuff response, it wasn't. That message - we stand by our brand, we listen to parents, and we endorse a balanced diet (ie. don't eat McDonald's every day) - was intentional. In a couple short sentences they negated an attack on their brand and re-enforced that McDonald's is 'family friendly'.
I was even impressed that they framed their offering as a 'treat' - the significance of that is that it negates a counter-rebuttal of McDonald's being a healthy choice or not and frames the offering in the same context as ice cream or chocolate bars or potato chips (ie. treats, not staples of a healthy diet). Would you sue Reese Piece's because your kid kept harassing you for another chocolate bar? Of course not.
A great example of how to respond to an attack on your brand - be direct, be clear, be concise and be to the point, and choose your words very carefully.
Full disclosure, I haven't eaten at McDonald's since I was a teenager. Why people go to McDonald's instead of say Subway is beyond my understanding. And why they would take their kids their knowing that burgers and fries are unhealthy escapes me as well. So I'm no McDonald's fan by any means, but their PR response was top-notch.
This is a great situation to discuss PR in the real world.
But can McDonald's come out and say something like that? Can they come out and say 'Hey, it's not our fault that your kids harass you, maybe you should look at your parenting technique instead of blaming us for their behavior. It's just a 25-cent plastic toy for heaven sake. What do you want us to do, make it so kids don't enjoy coming to McDonald's?"
Of course they can't say this because they would risk offending other parents, who expect businesses to respond to all parental concerns with the utmost attention (even if the concerns are silly and even if other parents don't share those concerns). When it comes to anything kid-related, the public is prone to working itself in to a hysteria (after all, we have to protect kids).
So from a PR perspective, what can McDonald's do? This story has hit the major media outlets, so what now?
Well, they've done the right thing... they've stood their ground with a very reasoned response.
McDonald's says it is proud of its Happy Meals and will vigorously defend the company's brand, its reputation and its food. "We stand on our 30-year track record of providing a fun experience for kids and families at McDonald's," said Bridget Coffing, a company spokesperson. "We listen to our customers, and parents consistently tell us they approve of our Happy Meals. We are confident that parents understand and appreciate that Happy Meals are a fun treat, with quality, right-sized food choices for their children that can fit into a balanced diet."Sometimes in PR you don't need to launch a major rebuttal. Sometimes you just have to address the issue and then let it fade away.
Their response was perfect in that they could have easily upset other parents by dismissing the concerns being brought forward by this mother. But by integrating all parents into their response, by emphasizing that parental feedback and concerns is how they shape their business, they are able to negate the worry of upsetting other parents in their response.
While your average Joe reading their response might think it's just an off-the-cuff response, it wasn't. That message - we stand by our brand, we listen to parents, and we endorse a balanced diet (ie. don't eat McDonald's every day) - was intentional. In a couple short sentences they negated an attack on their brand and re-enforced that McDonald's is 'family friendly'.
I was even impressed that they framed their offering as a 'treat' - the significance of that is that it negates a counter-rebuttal of McDonald's being a healthy choice or not and frames the offering in the same context as ice cream or chocolate bars or potato chips (ie. treats, not staples of a healthy diet). Would you sue Reese Piece's because your kid kept harassing you for another chocolate bar? Of course not.
A great example of how to respond to an attack on your brand - be direct, be clear, be concise and be to the point, and choose your words very carefully.
Full disclosure, I haven't eaten at McDonald's since I was a teenager. Why people go to McDonald's instead of say Subway is beyond my understanding. And why they would take their kids their knowing that burgers and fries are unhealthy escapes me as well. So I'm no McDonald's fan by any means, but their PR response was top-notch.
Comments
Post a Comment