Alys sent in a photograph of the packaging at her local McDonald’s. It included pictures, not of Chicken Clubs and Big Macs, but of the raw ingredients that these foods are (theoretically) made of… with the notable exception of realistic images of animals. The materials, Alys writes, were…
…adorned with pictures of healthy whole foods, such as a tomato or a head of lettuce. That in itself is interesting — they are clearly attempting to cash in on the whole-foods-are-good-for-you mentality despite the fact that there is hardly anything more processed than fast food — but what I found particularly fascinating was the animals, or rather the lack thereof. My chicken club sandwich package featured not a live chicken, but two little origami chickens. Similarly, the bag the food came in had a tin chicken knick-knack thing. My husband’s hamburger package was even more ambiguous. It’s a little hard to read in the picture, but “two all beef patties” is represented not with a cow, or a picture of the patties, or even an origami cow, but with a spatula. Clearly MacDonalds realizes that while Americans want to be reminded that the ketchup on their sandwich originally came from a tomato — and that means it’s healthy! — they do not want to look into eyes of the live animal that sacrificed its life to provide the main focus of the meal.
Comments 46
Tom M. — January 23, 2011
They could have just used a nice illustration of a cut of beef. After all, the whole onion and tomato plants aren't shown. They focus on the edible parts.
T — January 23, 2011
tick tock... how long before someone posts the first urban myth/unsubstantiated rumor about McDonald's food. How about a link to the 6 month old Happy Meal?
I was half expecting this when I saw the title of this post. And, Lisa, your little "(theoretically)" poke is DEFINITELY of this ilk... baseless rumor to justify your false disdain for fast food. I'm glad Alys presented her meal without apologizing for it as tends to happen.
Good to see the (substance of) the post was simply about the squeamishness of thinking about the slaughtered animals. This is pretty damn universal in this country -- even 'fancier' context, the most you'll see is the already dead and prepped raw food. For example a raw beef steak on a piece of brown paper or a raw chicken breast with a sprig of rosemary or whatever. They don't show the livestock.
Jordan — January 23, 2011
Does anyone think the average American consumer would be disgusted if there were a picture of a real chicken or cow on the package?
I highly doubt it.
Jack — January 23, 2011
I don't think this is a "mind trick" unless your mind is very easily tricked. And if you're worried about poor and/or PoC being 'tricked' by this sort of thing I think it says more about what you think of such people than anything else. I think this is more about just having various and brightly-colored images on the packaging.
A — January 23, 2011
I always think this is an interesting phenomenon- that people don't like to think of the animals they eat as they are eating them. It seems like a much healthier perspective to me to understand that we are consuming muscle and fat attached to bone, that comes from something that was once alive than to try to ignore the fact. I do think (personally) that our world could use a little more recognition that meat is animal is meat. People often find it odd that I think of livestock in terms of food. (Seeing a rabbit prompts comments from me about rabbit stew, and lambs make me think of chops.) But really, especially with livestock that has been bred to be domesticated, that's what it is. And recognizing that isn't sick, it's realistic.
So, I see the point here, and though I don't blame McDonald's for not wanting to make people squeamish, I do think it would be a good exercise for people to understand that, yes, animals died for their good. And yes, the food is still delicious.
Becky — January 23, 2011
At my children's school each Thanksgiving, they tell stories about turkeys, imagine turkeys trying to escape from being eaten by pretending not to be turkeys, etc. And all for a holiday that is all about eating turkey. I can't figure this out. Kind of similar to the smiling pig on the sausage package.
Leigh — January 23, 2011
"...they do not want to look into eyes of the live animal that sacrificed its life to provide the main focus of the meal." Well, would you?
Really, what is the point of this post? Is it some snide hint that we should all feel bad for not being vegetarian?
AusKatty — January 23, 2011
Here in Australia our McDonalds beef burger packaging comes with a complete diagram of a cow, divided into the different cuts of beef. It's under a slogan about how Australian McDonalds use "100% Australian beef".
Jazz — January 23, 2011
Seconding the Australian comment... there was a big ad campaign about Angus beef in recent years, and a focus on the actual cows and how they are Australian, high quality, etc. Part of what makes this work really well I think is the fact that cows generally do have quite good quality of life before they are slaughtered. The narrative is that you can feel great about supporting an Aussie farmer by eating delicious meat made from his pampered Angus cows, and btw this is totally upper class (unlike the burgers made from those bogan cows, I guess).
Chickens, on the other hand...
Rose — January 26, 2011
If this offends you so much, why on earth did you buy it?
Please note the way you use language yourself is shielding yourself from reality.
You say "sacrificed its life" - "it" (it is unlikely the animal was a hermaphrodite, so can we please say he or she?) stepped willingly into the sacrificial chamber for the greater good, did it? Or was it pushed and shoved after a lifetime of slavery and abuse?
a) The non-human animal did not sacrifice its own life. It was brutally slaughtered by a bigger human animal.
b) The animal had a gender, and a personality. It was an individual once, not just part of a processed hamburger.
Power of Marketing « Pleasures of Life — February 22, 2011
[...] Source. [...]
Environmental Sociology and Sociological Images | John Girdwood — January 9, 2015
[…] MCDONALD’S MIND TRICKS […]