No Pink Slip for Ronald McDonald

This entry was posted in text. Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to No Pink Slip for Ronald McDonald

  1. allyson flournoy says:

    This reminds me of the issue they are having in my hometown. In one county they are banning toys being given away in fast food because they believe that it attracts kids to unhealthy foods. This picture of Ronal Mcdonald reminds me and make me think if having a mascot like him is good for advertising to kids as well. I think that have a spokesperson like Ronald is just as bad if not worse.

  2. sean kim says:

    I never liked Ronald Mcdonald, he just creeped me out to much. But i think they should get rid of him and try something new and innovated, or just change up the costume a bit. They also need to find a new way to advertise to a different audience then kids since there have a legal issues with that. I also thought Allyson’s reply on banning toys from fast food was crazy, when i was young i loved the toys. even if i didnt eat the food, i would still want a toy.

  3. Leah Kennedy says:

    I just think it is really unrealistic to ask companies not to advertise ANY unhealthy food to kids, as many companies are now being asked to do. Hypothetically speaking, an unhealthy element could be found in almost food item, other than maybe a salad with no dressing, but we don’t want kids to limit their diets to just these foods. Maybe there does need to be a shift in advertising so that eating a balanced diet and eating everything in moderation is emphasized. But coming down on Ronald McDonald, who has been an icon across decades, does not seem like the ultimate answer to the problem. It seems more important to shift what he stands for in the public’s eye.

  4. Heidi Payghambari says:

    The attack on McDonald to “retire” Donald in my opinion is a bit extreme. Not that I am an advocate of the McDonalds industry, but the company has the right to keep and image that has been associated with its company for five decades. When you think of McDonald’s, you think of the golden arches and Donald. If people strongly oppose McDonalds targeting to children, different places can do what San Francisco did and ban toys in happy meals if the meal is more than 600 calories. Realistically, it is in the hands of children’s parents to filter what their child eats. In addition, the focus should not be eliminating Ronald to stop targeting to kids because if you ask one company to stop targeting to a certain demographic it can open up a can of worms, but rather, as Leah said, it should be to increase the “healthy” image of McDonald.

  5. I will admit that I had a McDonald’s phase when I was a little kid, as for Ronald? I can honestly say it wasn’t him that drew me in, it was the playpen and toys. I agree that this advertising to kids, catering to their wants then feeding them fast food is a problem. It’s effective and a problem. Ronald McDonald is by far the strongest mascot for fast food chains…perhaps followed closely in creepiness by the Burger King.
    I still believe it’s up to the parents to show their kids a well rounded plate. I agree with Leah, a shift to promote a balanced diet would certainly help. (Other than the school cafeteria, there aren’t many ads for “Eat your Colors”).
    All in all- you can’t squash Ronald (he’s too big of an icon and he’s already been here for decades), but you can shift the focus.

  6. Chie Oda says:

    I agree with Leah. I think this movement is not realistic. Ronald McDonald is just mascot. Some people think McDonald represents a symbol of unhealthy food and urges children to eat unhealthy food. Lots of people have negative and unfavorable feelings to McDonald, maybe. However, he is a just mascot. Also, he symbolizes McDonald’s. I think if McDonald gets fired, it means that McDonald’s closes down. I think a mascot is related to the brand deeply and strongly.
    Therefore, as people above say, McDonald should change his role from bad images people have to good one. McDonald’s can use its mascot to make McDonald’s healthy and good for children.
    After I read this article, I rethink a mascot is very important for a brand because a mascot will be a target when the brand is blamed.

  7. Ellie Boggs says:

    I don’t see any problem with at least beginning to phase out Ronald McDonald as a mascot. He doesn’t have to be fired in order to make him less prominent in eyes of future McDonald’s customers. In the article it mentions the way McDonald’s is re-branding by making the inside of the restaurant more classy looking and sleek. I really don’t think Ronald McDonald fits with the new image they are going for. A gradual phase out of him being featured in ads and promotional events would be perfectly acceptable.

  8. Katie Doyle says:

    I think that Ronald McDonald could retire and not a lot of people would notice and or care. Like they said in the article, he is not really relevant anymore. I know that when i was growing up, all of the Mcy D’s characters were. But now, i feel like i never see him in ads, commercials, on even those creepy statues that they had on the benches when you walked into a walmart. So, i think that maybe a new icon, or even not one at all would be better for mcdonalds. Just cause i think Ronald is slowly loosing his appeal.

  9. Amber Heitkemper says:

    In most commercials for mcdonalds they do not use Ronald so they could phase him out of the picture completely. They should create a new icon.

  10. nedmills says:

    I don’t think they should have to phase him out simply because the majority of advertisements now don’t even include him. I admit that this was a little surprising to write simply because clowns are probably the creepiest profession ever, but I still believe they should be able to have a mascot and at times use him for promotions. I stand by the fact that although advertisement is highly influential to children, we are in no place most of the time to tell them how they advertise their food.

  11. alexandra reyes says:

    Ronald is freaky or clowns are just freaky in general. I don’t get why people love them so much. Ronald retiring is better then getting rid of the toys. I loved the toys and the ads for them. I know SF is trying to get rid of the toys so kids aren’t influenced by them. I rather them get rid of him and keep the toys. However, both are bad. Also I remember France or some European country was trying to limit Mcdonlads in some way. Parents are responsible for their kids, but I say let them keep one of the other. Toys or the clown.

  12. Max Williams says:

    I think McDonalds might be best off just phasing him out a little. While I don’t think they should totally get rid of Ronald, I don’t think he works quite as well as he once did. As someone who completely despises McDonalds, I still don’t really have a problem with Ronald; its not like McDonalds is going to stop marketing to kids entirely. With their new image though, it would be nice to see them advertise more healthy foods, which I think they are doing to a degree in my opinion.

  13. Kristen Andersen says:

    I have to disagree about phasing Ronald out although he is not a key part of mcdonalds campaign anymore he still creates that resonance with older generations and even myself. Besides marketers always have more than one campaign going especially with big companies like mcD’s so just dont use ronald as much

Comments are closed.