Brand enhancement: another thought-provoking argument

19 June 2013 by in Business and finance

Here’s another thought-provoking argument about fast food brands and their use of a Disney tie-in to enhance their brand. But it seems to us it’s all a bit old hat (and the one comment on the site as I write this would seem to agree with me). MacDonald’s and Burger King have been doing this kind of thing for ages and so the argument goes that it probably works in terms of engaging with kids and, more importantly, their parents. But haven’t these brands got some real social responsibility in terms of trying to get young people to eat healthily? Is a tie in with Monsters Inc. going to do anything to reduce obesity in this country?

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERAYeah, I know, it isn’t their remit to get kids to eat healthily. It’s their remit to increase their investors’ dividends (oh I’m such an old leftie!) The operative word in the article is ‘healthier’ (‘In-store training has been provided to staff to improve their interaction with children and encourage them to choose healthier options.’) I’m not a nutritionist (my waist line bears that out) but I reckon their healthier options are still packed with salt fat and sugar, all of which probably exceed the recommended daily intake.

It all just seems a tad lazy on the part of the marketers involved. Bung a few million at a big brand for a tie in – job done.

Let me get my soap box out again (sorry) but shouldn’t brands be trying to engage with their customers through intelligently produced, interesting content? I mean interesting, well written, properly informative content that might – just might – make people properly aware of what they are actually feeding their kids? Surely with a bit of intelligent thinking, brands can increase their consumer engagement and improve customer loyalty?

Anyway, I’ve put my soap box away and am heading off for a waistline-saving Subway feast with a Big Mac for pudding. Now where’s the harm in that?