Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

McDonalds Ads - tell us how do you feel about them folks?

16 replies

JustineMumsnet · 01/03/2011 16:22

Good day MNetters,
We've been asked if we'd host ads for McDonalds, so we thought we'd ask what you think. Would you object to banner ads (ie like the one at the top of the page) on Mumsnet?
Let us know.

JustineMumsnet · 07/03/2011 11:06

Good morning all,
Thanks to everyone for contributing to this discussion.

First of all, some have wondered why we asked. Well, our advertising policy has always been informed by discussion with MNetters - obviously your views matter as the last thing we want to do is take a decision about the site that loads of Mnetters would object to. We are very conscious that you choose to come and post here and that there's no lock on the door Smile so although clearly you can't please everyone all of the time we don't tend to take top down decisions on stuff like this. I strongly believe that without consultation, the site would be a very different (and less special) place.

Mumsnet's business model, however, is advertising. We need the ads to generate revenue to pay for our staff and servers. We don't think there's another model that works for mumsnet and so the ads are something we have to live with.

That said, we clearly won't work with everyone and we view our policy on advertisers and businesses we work with as a fluid one, determined in consultation with Mumsnetters.

In this particular case the advertising agency who works for McDonald's approached us to say they had a brief and would we be up for taking ads from McD's - they are looking to target parents with a new campaign they are doing. It doesn't mean we'll get their advertising if we say yes, just that we'll be one of the sites in the mix for consideration.

We have traditionally said no to McD's because we've had this discussion periodically and over the years quite a lot of folks have objected because they felt McD's buying policies, in particular, have been unethical (The Fast Food Nation critique). Last time we we had this discussion - maybe a 2 or 3 years ago - the reaction was around 50-50. We asked again this time because there is some suggestion that McD's are getting their act together on this issue a bit (although we don't claim to be experts). And indeed it seems that analysing the response on this thread (and the other one in AIBU) it does seem that the "don't minds" now outnumber the "do minds" by some way. So we are of a mind to change our policy on McD's

In general, we don't believe that display ads (ie the image and text ads around the place) on MN carry our endorsement. We wouldn't actively endorse a number of companies that we take display ads from - either because we'd never tried their products or didn't think they fitted over-well with the MN Brand. The only actual MN endorsements we give are as a result of our Product Reviews or following focus groups/testing. We will generally give closer consideration though to who we allow to be Discount partners, who we allow to sponsor bits of MN (and use words like sponsored by or in partnership with) and the type of language we'll use with relation to ads - we try to avoid the cheesy type of "we're so pleased to be partnering with xxxx".

We do also believe this is a site for grown-ups, not children. Much of the subject matter and language used is rather adult [understatement] Grin and it's definitely an adult, not children's audience we are catering for.

Broadly speaking my personal view is that we should get the management of companies we end up boycotting, like Nestle, on for a webchat and put them and their policies under scrutiny. I tend to believe that engagement is the way to change things and that people should have a right to reply, but I do recognise that others feel that they'd rather not give such companies a platform. Anyway, thanks very much for your thoughts on this. As said we do operate a fluid policy and nothing is set in stone; and we are always very pleased to hear your thoughts and expertise on this or indeed anything else.

JustineMumsnet · 07/03/2011 11:38

@slim22

If your revenue depends on this sort of endorsements so be it, we don't want the site to go bankrupt, but if you are thinking upping the stakes in view of a sellout, I'd be very disappointed.

I think you have done a great job and have something very valuable in your hands now. If you think that you are reaching the tipping point and will cash out on this in the near future (my bet, and kudos! you should), we would like a hint, because it would become a very different place indeed.

Slim22 - we're not about to go bankrupt if we don't get the McD's ads. Neither are we upping the stakes for a sellout. We are as we always have basing our policy on who we don't allow to advertise on a discussion with members. As we thought it might have, views about McD's have softened. By our calculations those who don't object have outnumbered those who do by around 2 to 1 on this thread and by a higher ration than that on the AIBU thread. Hence the change in policy. Glasnost - no we had not decided to change policy before we asked the question. How could we - what if everyone had said no to McDs?

JustineMumsnet · 07/03/2011 11:48

@PaperView

Justine, i think that by having ads on the site (ANY advert!) then you are saying that MN supports that product and/or company.

Interesting. I don't agree though really - we carried ads for Tories and Labour during the election.

JustineMumsnet · 07/03/2011 13:26

@BecauseImWorthIt

Who you accept advertising from is, of course, entirely up to you, as it is your business. And believe you me, I know how difficult these kind of decision are. Where do you draw the line?

But I wonder how many of MN members have even read this thread, never mind voted on it? I know it's been a sticky, and it's been there for a while, but I'm constantly amazed by the number of (fairly regular) posters who seem to miss sticky threads.

Does this therefore count as a true consultation exercise? It seems a very significant thing, such a change in policy.

Can only say again - we have always used discussion on the site to inform our ad policy. It's not scientific it's indicative and I think it gives us a pretty fair indication of the strength of feeling although of course it can never be completely accurate - but then what would be? MN is after all a discussion site. Can you imagine if we suddenly changed policy, do you really think it wouldn't be discussed? Think a lot of folk (dare I say including you and and Eleison BIWI Grin) would be the first to say, I can't believe you changed your policy without discussing it first, don't you? And rightly so because that's the way we've done it since we started.

JustineMumsnet · 07/03/2011 13:28

@MilaMae

Jamie's got Innocent ads on his site,why can't we?

Feel like I've stepped into a virtual Jamie's Dinners sooooooo need to get him on here glasnost.

I personally believe there was an awful lot of crappy eating showing off on half of this thread,Mcmuffin one upmanship,you get a snowball effect,seen it time and time again. Why on earth you'd want to base such an important decision on it is beyond me.

Don't worry Innocent (owned by Coca Cola btw) coming soon Wink.

JustineMumsnet · 07/03/2011 13:34

@BecauseImWorthIt

Justine - I absolutely agree about discussion! I think it's a great thing that you do this, and value the input of MNetters actually I think you're quite mad to take any notice of us Grin.

The point I was trying to make was that I wondered how many MNers had taken part, and if this was enough/representative.

As I said it's indicative. (nb There is an interesting stat about surveys - something along the lines of you can predict the result of surveys of 1000 plus within an accuracy of 5% after the first 100 responses...I'll dig it out.)

JustineMumsnet · 07/03/2011 13:38

@Eleison

Nope, I wouldn't have said it Justine. I dislike the equvocation of business and community entity and I think that consulting on something like the adverts you take is exactly such an equivocation.

I think there are two entirely distinct things: (1) a business owning a talk platform and selling ads; and (2) a set of talkers. I have never wanted a say in the business, because I have never wanted to pretend that a business can champion me. I only want to ensure that whenever the business claims to talk for the talkers, it does so on very good grounds. I would prefer it not to talk for us.

You sure the odd "shambolic handling" mightn't have slipped out? Grin

JustineMumsnet · 07/03/2011 13:40

@MilaMae

God is nothing sacred Sad

Any Fairtrade companies in the pipeline?

I don't see how you're discussing it though if you're ignoring(and not addressing) many of the valid points that have been raised.

We had Shelter in the last newsletter... and Marie Curie and St John's ambulance (charities all get half price rate) and the Co-ops just signed up for a campaign.

I thought I'd addressed most of the points raised in my post, MilaMae and am still here...

JustineMumsnet · 07/03/2011 13:45

@Eleison

I don't know what you mean: I said you were engaging in a nominal consultation which was in fact shambolic, and that the effect was that you co-opt MNers in as a supportive voice approving a decision that you then make. I don't think I sia dyou should have had a consultation: only that if you consult, you should do it well.

We are genuinely interested in what MNetters think on this issue. Not sure how else we'd find out what they think other than discussing it on talk. 95% of action on MNet is on Talk. This thread has been live and in active conversations since last Tuesday - 6 days. There have been 2 other lively discussions along the same lines in AIBU.

Having said that I would never claim to be anything other than shambolic.

JustineMumsnet · 07/03/2011 13:49

ps Active Conversations is our busiest page on the site. Since Tues it has received nearly half a million page views.

JustineMumsnet · 07/03/2011 14:04

@Eleison

Well, I think MNHQ has a tendency to overstate the democratic potential (Grin) of a chat thread. You often seem to talk like you were a membership organisation like the ones you campaign alongside. But if you were, then there would be a formal constitution, a governing body, votes, etc. etc. A chat thread isn't a survey -- which would be daft because you are a business. Perhaps a universal mailout to users would count as asking effectively? I don't know. I just want to talk among the other users.

And all I want to do is to provide a decent platform for you to talk to the other users, make sure I can pay my staff (and maybe even turn a modest profit Smile) and not piss off all the users.

JustineMumsnet · 07/03/2011 14:18

@Eleison

Thought for one ghastly second you told me to piss off then, JM. [horror]

I do appreciate very much a lot of what you have done. I just fear the transition suggested bt Slim, from authentic voice of mothers to mothers, to projected processed voice of "valuable database" selling women's thoughts back to them. It seems inevitable, though. Perhaps it was never possible that it wouldn't happen.

I just don't get this selling thoughts back business, sorry. How exactly are we selling your thoughts back to you?

JustineMumsnet · 07/03/2011 14:34

@BecauseImWorthIt

Whilst I think the discussion has been interesting, perhaps you could now do a poll? Post a link on the site to the survey.

That will then give you 'proper' statistics.

You could also publicise the poll in the round-up, or parenting news, or the other ways that you regularly communicate with MNetters.

We could if we were going to use these stats for anything other than to inform our own policy. But we aren't. What we needed to have a nuanced conversation where we could get a sense of the strength of feeling. What's more active conversations, as said, is by far the most visited page on the site - getting loads more eyeballs in a week than the newsletters or any poll we've done.

JustineMumsnet · 07/03/2011 15:07

@MilaMae

Ooo good news re Co-Op quite like them....unless there is anything else I need to know?

Re the healthy eating Justine how on earth are you going to get involved in any future discussions regarding this issue? I feel when you're interviewed at the moment you/mn carry a certain amount of respect on issues you engage in,I fear this will be lost if you run a McD ad.

Also although you may not be condoning it do you not feel that promoting junk food on a parenting site is wrong?

Hi Mila,
The answer to this really is that we regard MN as a site for parents, rather than a site that tells people how to parent IYSWIM.

JustineMumsnet · 07/03/2011 17:30

@MistyB

In that case, why the statement regarding Nestle, McDonalds and cosmetic surgery on your "About us" page? What had changed?

As I posted earlier down:

We have traditionally said no to McD's because we've had this discussion periodically and over the years quite a lot of folks have objected because they felt McD's buying policies, in particular, have been unethical (The Fast Food Nation critique). Last time we we had this discussion - maybe a 2 or 3 years ago - the reaction was around 50-50. We asked again this time because there is some suggestion that McD's are getting their act together on this issue a bit (although we don't claim to be experts). And indeed it seems that analysing the response on this thread (and the other one in AIBU) it does seem that the "don't minds" now outnumber the "do minds" by some way. So we are of a mind to change our policy on McD's.

We will update the About Us page to reflect this shortly.

JustineMumsnet · 07/03/2011 17:33

@glasnost

Sorry but you still haven't said why you're prepared to alienate so many thinking mums by running these ad's when you could just as easily take another company's cash.

Hi Glasnost, There's no either/ or about it, the McDonalds ads wouldn't be instead of another. We have capacity on the site for many more ads than we sell. The Mark Warner/Boden ads for example aren't paid for - they are an affiliate relationship. If people click on them and buy something we get a small %. We run them when have spare capacity, which we always do.

Watch this thread for updates

Tap "Watch" to get all the latest updates

End of posts

There are no more MNHQ posts on this thread