http://www.studioglyphic.com/blog/
Please update your links, bookmarks, and RSS Feedreaders. All comments have been disabled.
« Read this article | Main | John Kerry the soldier »
March 13, 2004
StudioGlyphic vs. the Daily Trojan
When McDonald's decided to phase out its Supersize menu, it didn't seem newsworthy to StudioGlyphic. The Daily Trojan's editorial board, on the other hand, thought the move was "a defeat for responsibility."
...
It's one thing for McDonald's to create an alternate, healthier menu for people who would rather not stop for fast food, but just don't have time for anything else. The decision to cut out the Supersize option, though, is advocacy pressure, pure and simple, not consumer demand.
But why does that pressure exist at all? It's the result of the disappearance of personal responsibility. Popular culture trumpets the death of responsibility: go ahead and be sexually promiscuous, there are no ramifications if you practice safe sex. Unwanted pregnancy? Go to an abortion clinic. Smoke for 50 years and then sue the company making the cigarettes because they didn't adequately inform you that maybe, just maybe, pumping your lungs full of smoke might not be good for you. Don't forget the infamous Twinkie defense; a murderer got off by pleading that he was on a sugar high from Twinkies.
The loss of Supersize is another victory for the forces that refuse to acknowledge individual culpability.
I'm sure McDonald's has good reasons for removing the SuperSize option from its menu; they're probably tired of being the whipping boy for America's obesity problem. Google "supersize" and "obesity" and you get 3950 results.
Lexis-Nexis turns up 247 results.
With the growing association between these two terms, McDonald's is looking out for its image as a brand and as a responsible corporate entity.
More to the point, your underlying thesis that McDonald's actions are symptomatic of a shirking of personal responsibility in society oversimplifies the issues surrounding these "frivolous lawsuits."
The notion of personal responsibility and, by extension, consumer choice, rests upon the assumption that individuals have perfect knowledge of available alternatives and consequences when making decisions.
This is rarely the case.
Smokers who began smoking at age 13 or at a time when cigarette companies used "doctor" endorsements to promote their products could hardly be characterized as rational actors.
Investors who relied upon fraudulent analysis and misleading earnings reports were likewise ill-equipped to make the right choice.
In a world of "sexed-up intelligence," the courts are often the last resort of individuals confronting the failures of responsibility of corporations, regulators, and the media.
Taking away this option under the guise of promoting individual responsibility would undermine our democracy.
Posted by glyphic at March 13, 2004 05:05 PM