Which is Riskier

Which is Riskier - Which is Riskier? Eating Chicken McBites...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Which is Riskier? Eating Chicken McBites or Petting a Stray Pit Bulll? http://news.yahoo.com/mcdonalds-pulls-ad-pit-bull-owner-outrage-005633225.html Above, I have shared the article titled “McDonald’s Pulls Ad After Pit Bull Owner Outrage.” In this article it explains why McDonald’s had to pull their ad for their new Chicken McBites radio ad. According to the article the ad said, “Eating a Chicken McBite was less risky than petting a stray pit bull, shaving your head, naming your son Sue or giving friends your Facebook password.” Pit bull lovers were outraged and immediately started creating Facebook pages, Twitter threads, and online petitions against McDonalds radio ad locally played in Kansas City. McDonald’s immediately pulled the ad and issued a statement saying, “The ad was insensitive in its mention of pit bulls. We apologize. As soon as we learned of it, we tracked the source and had the local markets pull the ad immediately. We’ll do a better job next time. It’s never our intent to offend anyone with how we communicate news about McDonald’s.” When reading this article it reminded me of the concept of communication being a transactional process. We learned this concept in Chapter 2 page 28 of our class textbook. According to our text the goal of the transactional process is “adapting messages to the needs and expectations of listeners.” I think that this concept relates to the article due to how the public (receiver’s) understood the meaning of McDonalds radio ad. The public interpreted the ad as “offensive,” “stupid,” “insinuating eating their food is risky,” etc. These responses on social networking sites represented a type of feedback for McDonalds. The company responded quickly by pulling the ad and issuing an apology admitting “its never our intent to offend anyone.” McDonalds responded back to the public showing they were affected by the feedback they received. Although I am not a huge pit bull lover, however I understand why people were upset and agree that McDonalds was at fault for producing that radio ad. I still do not really understand why they would compare their food to “risky” activities, it does not seem appealing to me. I also think in the future McDonalds should test their ads more and be careful about what messages they share with the public. After McDonald’s pulled the ad and issued an apology some people that were previously upset forgave them and others want more. People are demanding that McDonald’s make “a donation to some pit bull organizations and a McDonald’s ad featuring a pit bull.” My questions for you are; did McDonalds radio ad appeal to you? How well do you think McDonalds handled the situation? Do you think McDonalds
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 02/27/2012 for the course COM 339 taught by Professor Shulman during the Spring '11 term at Miami University.

Page1 / 7

Which is Riskier - Which is Riskier? Eating Chicken McBites...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online