Talking about fast food - should we do online chat with MacDonalds' new chap?

[carriemumsnet]

As most of you know Mac D's are on our banned advertiser's list, so we don't currently take any banners/ ads/ competition /sponsorship from them.

They've recently approached us to see if we would do a live online chat with their new head of food development, Mike Faers, who has apparently worked previously at Le Gavroche restaurant in London and also M&S and Sainsburys.

We're sure Mumsnetters could think of quite a few things they'd like to ask McDonald's, and we think it would be quite interesting to hear what they have to say, not just in terms of happy meals/menus but in terms of the whole MacDonald's brand/global strategy etc., but wanted to check with you all before confirming it, that you'd be happy for this to go ahead.

As always it would be live, with the chance to ask questions in advance, and no holds barred. We've warned him that you're a feisty bunch but he's still keen.

So what say you - shall we give Mike a go?

I wonder if it is possible salt is the reason why DD wont eat McDs.
She wont even eat veggies at my parents because they salt their veg and we never do. She spits them out - odd child!

True, they will have thought of every question, of course. And he will have stock answers ready, true. And there will be a 20 yo PR looking over his

So do you think we'll be persuaded by them or some people will and therefore it WILL be good PR for them?

The only bad publicity is no publicity.

Not sure I agree re no publicity.
Kerry Katona's publicity isn't all good.

bad example, sorry, couldn't think of anything else!

but everyone talks about it, it becomes part of our lives. Everyone knows who she is and has a view. Doesn't matter if you like her or not. Same with McDs.

See? I'm here talking about it! Raising awareness, going on ...

But if the posts are mostly negative (aside from fence sitters, I have Never seen Pro MacDonalds posts on here!) then surely that raises awareness of the bad issues rather than people just accepting that because it is talked about, it must be okay.

im interested in why he wants to do this.is he hoping to find out what,if anything,would make those totally anti-mcD's parents want to take their dc there,or is he hoping to convince MNers that mcD's food is actually ok(in which case i would suspect he has got confused with another site)?

He wants to do it, I'd guess, because mn won't take their advertising and that must be somewhat of a challenge for them. Last bastion of principles and all that.

is MN going to let their banners appear though? Or is this just purely about a live web chat only?

it is fine by me
do we need to be careful wrt to legal issues though?
McD's are not well known for taking public criticism lightly

Carrie, can we ask them WHY they want to do it?

Oh yes, they need to promise not to sue ANY of us. 100%. Bet they won't. In which case I say no, they shouldn't be allowed on.

ah,[dumb blonde emoticon],so it would be a bit of both really;'why dont you take your kids to mcd's?''cos you serve salt mixed with fat and instant mash powder formed into fries and pass it off as food','oh,no,its really healthy 100% beef,real potatoes blah di blah di..'

Well yes the litigious side of it concerns me too tbh.

Yes, they are VERY litigious, worse than almost anyone I can think of.

speaking of litigious, must get back to the tax books...

d'oh,maybe that last post should be deleted then.i'm not allowed to say anything against mcD's at home as dh used to work there and wont hear a word against them (maybe something to do with the staff brainwashing training)

They'll use it as pro-advertising no matter what is said on here. "McD had a very useful day answering questions on MN. Everybody was very happy" (you can tell I'm not a marketing person can't you)

I agree BS, even if they get slammed on here they will use it in their promotional material, they want to be on mn because it benefits them to link the brands in the public eye.

Most mners care about their children's diets and are aware of the pitfalls of feeding them too much fast foods. It is not those children I worry about, it is the ones whose mums will glance at a headline or quote somewhere that links the two brands and think that mn endorses mcd's so it can't be that bad. That is what they are aiming for.

I agree with Carmeneres assessment.

This will not do neither mumsnet nor the members any good. It is a very good and well crafted pr exercise on part of macdonald. They will benefit immensly, and possibly sell more crap food as a result. Keerching!

Exactly. What's in it for MN?

I think this is a great idea. If McDonalds is trying to use a parenting site to craftily market itself then better Mumsnet than Netmums or Bounty.

Mumsnet: 'You are evil, manipulative, animal butchering, child-obesity causing, litigious world-dominating peddlars of chemical shite'

Bounty: 'McDonalds Monopoly!! Ne1 got any spare tiket thingys?'

Of course, the PR team will be prepared. Personally this is giving me a huge incentive to re-do my homework, sharpen my arguments about why it is so evil and dust off my well-thumbed copy of Fast Food Nation.

Here's hoping for a reasoned argument and firm rules for McDonalds about publicising the online chat without spin.

[goes off to re-read the David and Goliath court case notes and human/animal rights vs McDonalds info].

This is a great idea. I shall watch with interest.

tigermoth - have you tried their apple slices? It may be hard to muck up fruit but they seem to manage. I couldn't eat them. (I didn't buy them btw, I was given them through work)

The litigious side would be worth investigating.