Pages: 1 … 7 8 9 10 11 … 14

Topic closed

2010-04-30 08:21:10
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6756

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

sigh

This is pretty strongly cut by oceanic divides. The poor, poor souls that have never had a good dose of freedom, strong parenting, or hamburgers just can't understand.

Also, why did Uzique stop responding to me?
i made a response, you must have just scrolled past it. i haven't been super attentive in the last hour because im reading paradise lost.

your unconquerable genius hasn't triumphed just yet
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
2010-04-30 08:26:55
BLdw
..
+27|5457|M104 "Sombrero"

JohnG@lt wrote:

BLdw wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

That's American culture. It's got nothing to do with their marketing.
Marketing has nothing to do with culture?
Sure, it's used to emphasize what already exists. It very rarely works at creating something from nothing.
So American culture has something to do with (their) marketing?

Isn't marketing a way to forward culture towards a certain direction?
2010-04-30 08:27:38
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5644|London, England

BLdw wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

BLdw wrote:

Marketing has nothing to do with culture?
Sure, it's used to emphasize what already exists. It very rarely works at creating something from nothing.
So American culture has something to do with (their) marketing?

Isn't marketing a way to forward culture towards a certain direction?
The vast majority of marketing is completely ineffective. I'm sure they marketed their asses off to sell people 8-track tape players but it failed anyway. Same goes for things like Windows Vista. All the marketing in the world won't convince people to buy what they don't actually like.

Last edited by JohnG@lt (2010-04-30 08:28:49)

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2010-04-30 08:33:41
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6756
well the macdonalds marketing is obviously particularly effective then, isn't it?

it's clearly not 'unsuccessful' marketing, so you can put down your theory handbook and look at the fucking case-in-point. happy meals have been around, globally, for... how long now? if that was an example of unsuccessful marketing they would have stopped investing money in producing toys/maintaining contracts and would have stopped advertising it. if it wasn't successfully inculcating kids with the vague-subliminal belief that macdonalds = happy times, then they would have redeveloped and redesigned their brand image a long time ago. the clown was an icon for a long time, and he wasn't an icon because it made the fucking adults happy.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
2010-04-30 08:34:32
BLdw
..
+27|5457|M104 "Sombrero"

JohnG@lt wrote:

BLdw wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:


Sure, it's used to emphasize what already exists. It very rarely works at creating something from nothing.
So American culture has something to do with (their) marketing?

Isn't marketing a way to forward culture towards a certain direction?
The vast majority of marketing is completely ineffective. I'm sure they marketed their asses off to sell people 8-track tape players but it failed anyway. Same goes for things like Windows Vista. All the marketing in the world won't convince people to buy what they don't actually like.
Yes, and?
2010-04-30 08:34:40
11 Bravo
Banned
+965|5523|Cleveland, Ohio
mcd's does  = happy times.  its not a lie.  nothing wrong.
2010-04-30 08:36:06
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5644|London, England

BLdw wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

BLdw wrote:


So American culture has something to do with (their) marketing?

Isn't marketing a way to forward culture towards a certain direction?
The vast majority of marketing is completely ineffective. I'm sure they marketed their asses off to sell people 8-track tape players but it failed anyway. Same goes for things like Windows Vista. All the marketing in the world won't convince people to buy what they don't actually like.
Yes, and?
So your point fails. The hamburger culture already existed in America before McDonald's came along with their happy meals. All their marketing does is convince people to eat at their restaurant instead of their competitors, not whether people should or shouldn't eat the food in the first place.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2010-04-30 08:40:41
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,817|6392|eXtreme to the maX
The hamburger culture would have grown at least in part due to the marketing of hamburger companies.

Unless you're saying the Red Indians had it when America was colonised or the founding fathers brought the recipe with them.
Fuck Israel
2010-04-30 08:42:30
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5644|London, England

Dilbert_X wrote:

The hamburger culture would have grown at least in part due to the marketing of hamburger companies.

Unless you're saying the Red Indians had it when America was colonised or the founding fathers brought the recipe with them.
It was brought to America by German immigrants, same as the frankfurter (hot dog). Probably why the cities of Hamburg and Frankfurt are so pronounced in the names themselves...

So was beer.

Last edited by JohnG@lt (2010-04-30 08:43:24)

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2010-04-30 08:44:17
11 Bravo
Banned
+965|5523|Cleveland, Ohio
dogbert just wants to be anti anything american.  same with ruis.  mods call this debate.  lol
2010-04-30 09:40:04
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,982|6918|949

reopened for 'debate'
2010-04-30 09:43:53
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6756
nicely done, ken.

this isn't anything to do with 'america', or 'american culture' specifically; it has nothing to do with (child) obesity:-

it is legislation against METHODS OF MARKETING and COMPANY-CONSUMER ETHICS

stop fucking talking about other fast-food chains being healthier, or the fact that kids are still fat. this is targeting a corporate attitude, not a societal disease.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
2010-04-30 09:44:57
11 Bravo
Banned
+965|5523|Cleveland, Ohio
well we dont see anything immoral about what mcd's is doing.
2010-04-30 09:47:34
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6756
even though it's public knowledge that their strategy purposefully aims to inculcate and psychologically influence children?

in my opinion, as an absolute statement re: corporate ethics, no methods of marketing or advertisement should especially target children. it's exploitative, at a base level. the company consciously makes a decision to (mis)lead an individual whose levels of responsibility and awareness are obviously sub-par.

of course omitting (reasonable) industries that are exclusively 'for children', e.g. toys.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
2010-04-30 09:49:37
11 Bravo
Banned
+965|5523|Cleveland, Ohio
why shouldnt they target kids?  i mean thats a pretty big group.  and parents have the cash.
2010-04-30 09:51:09
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6867|SE London

11 Bravo wrote:

well we dont see anything immoral about what mcd's is doing.
So you see no problem with marketing targeted at children, predominantly poor children, which will in many cases (deliberately) affect their dietary trends permanently, leading to massively increased health risks and lower quality of life?

Last edited by Bertster7 (2010-04-30 09:52:51)

2010-04-30 09:53:03
11 Bravo
Banned
+965|5523|Cleveland, Ohio

Bertster7 wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

well we dont see anything immoral about what mcd's is doing.
So you see no problem with marketing targeted at children, predominantly poor children, which will in many cases affect their dietary trends permanently, leading to massively increased health risks and lower quality of life?
how in gods name?  unless all kids will be vegetarians they are going to eat red meat.  so a hamburger is immoral now?

Last edited by 11 Bravo (2010-04-30 09:58:36)

2010-04-30 09:57:02
jord
Member
+2,382|6964|The North, beyond the wall.

Bertster7 wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

well we dont see anything immoral about what mcd's is doing.
So you see no problem with marketing targeted at children, predominantly poor children, which will in many cases (deliberately) affect their dietary trends permanently, leading to massively increased health risks and lower quality of life?
From a McDonalds a week to lower quality of lives for poor children? Only here.


If the parents are going McDonalds anyway then the kid gets a Happy Meal. I doubt the parents go specifically out of the way to go and get a meal because the kid wants a toy worth 10p. Either way they're eating McDonalds when they go there, toy or not. And when they're a bit older and learn about healthy diet then they can chose what they wanna eat themselves.

I was happy with any fast food when I was younger, Burger King, KFC, McDonalds, Fish n Chips. The toys are shite.
2010-04-30 09:57:08
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6867|SE London

11 Bravo wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

well we dont see anything immoral about what mcd's is doing.
So you see no problem with marketing targeted at children, predominantly poor children, which will in many cases affect their dietary trends permanently, leading to massively increased health risks and lower quality of life?
how in gods name?  unless that kid will be vegetarians they are going to eat red meat.  so a hamburger is immoral now?
Nothing wrong with a hamburger at all.

A McDonalds burger isn't a proper hamburger. It's made from horrible ingredients in a horrible way, all to make it cheap. Pumped full of chemicals (mostly quite harmful to your health) to make it more appealing and satisfying.
2010-04-30 09:59:25
11 Bravo
Banned
+965|5523|Cleveland, Ohio

Bertster7 wrote:

A McDonalds burger isn't a proper hamburger. It's made from horrible ingredients in a horrible way, all to make it cheap. Pumped full of chemicals (mostly quite harmful to your health) to make it more appealing and satisfying.
so is most beef at the supermarket that people buy.  same with chicken.  hell fruit is even ripened with chemicals.
2010-04-30 10:00:38
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6867|SE London

jord wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

well we dont see anything immoral about what mcd's is doing.
So you see no problem with marketing targeted at children, predominantly poor children, which will in many cases (deliberately) affect their dietary trends permanently, leading to massively increased health risks and lower quality of life?
From a McDonalds a week to lower quality of lives for poor children? Only here.


If the parents are going McDonalds anyway then the kid gets a Happy Meal. I doubt the parents go specifically out of the way to go and get a meal because the kid wants a toy worth 10p. Either way they're eating McDonalds when they go there, toy or not. And when they're a bit older and learn about healthy diet then they can chose what they wanna eat themselves.

I was happy with any fast food when I was younger, Burger King, KFC, McDonalds, Fish n Chips. The toys are shite.
You might doubt it, billions upon billions of dollars of advertising spend say different.

Kids predominantly want their fast food from chain outlets they have seen advertised. Burger King, KFC, McDonalds - all the same.
2010-04-30 10:01:00
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,982|6918|949

They aren't even forcing them to stop advertising to kids.  If their happy meals pass minimum federal dietary guidelines they can advertise to whoever they want. 1/4 kids in the county are obese, higher than the national average.  This leads to increased health care costs for the county.

Yes, the parents should be partly to blame.  This seems like a pretty good compromise to me.

11b what's your main 'beef' with this?
2010-04-30 10:01:45
11 Bravo
Banned
+965|5523|Cleveland, Ohio

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

11b what's your main 'beef' with this?
i said that on page one in my first response.
2010-04-30 10:03:57
jord
Member
+2,382|6964|The North, beyond the wall.

Bertster7 wrote:

jord wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

So you see no problem with marketing targeted at children, predominantly poor children, which will in many cases (deliberately) affect their dietary trends permanently, leading to massively increased health risks and lower quality of life?
From a McDonalds a week to lower quality of lives for poor children? Only here.


If the parents are going McDonalds anyway then the kid gets a Happy Meal. I doubt the parents go specifically out of the way to go and get a meal because the kid wants a toy worth 10p. Either way they're eating McDonalds when they go there, toy or not. And when they're a bit older and learn about healthy diet then they can chose what they wanna eat themselves.

I was happy with any fast food when I was younger, Burger King, KFC, McDonalds, Fish n Chips. The toys are shite.
You might doubt it, billions upon billions of dollars of advertising spend say different.

Kids predominantly want their fast food from chain outlets they have seen advertised. Burger King, KFC, McDonalds - all the same.
I agree they do want them from the big chains.

I can't remember an age I wanted to get Mcd's for dinner for the toy though. I can remember back until I was like 5 too...

Last edited by jord (2010-04-30 10:04:17)

2010-04-30 10:04:36
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6867|SE London

11 Bravo wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

A McDonalds burger isn't a proper hamburger. It's made from horrible ingredients in a horrible way, all to make it cheap. Pumped full of chemicals (mostly quite harmful to your health) to make it more appealing and satisfying.
so is most beef at the supermarket that people buy.  same with chicken.  hell fruit is even ripened with chemicals.
No it isn't.

Chicken is typically pumped with of water and chock full of anti-biotics. But then, don't get me started on cheap supermarket chickens and the horribleness of them. Some supermarkets in the UK only pay 2p each for their budget range chickens.

All this crap cheaply produced food is out there to take advantage of poor, under-educated people. It's exploitation.

Topic closed

Pages: 1 … 7 8 9 10 11 … 14

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard