| (Pages: 1, 2, 3) | |
... They're giving out free burgers. What's the problem? | |
Well in my opinion, Burger King is better so they did get the better burger. Still this is a cruel and stupid act as then the hungry people will be without the burgers quickly though they still got a feed. | |
Welp, I'm too much of a misanthrope to care too much about this. At the same time, really, what were they thinking? | |
I didn't understand the OP's problem until Dommy's post. It's certainly stupid because the opinions of people who have no idea what good food is isn't very important, unless BK has plans to open any restaurants in those areas. I don't see it as cruel. They're giving away food, it's their food to give away, stop whining. | |
I suppose if you put it that way it's not SO bad, but just taking people from poor villages and asking them to compare your company's burger to the other guys to prove to the gluttonous masses that theirs is better just rubs me the wrong way. | |
I suppose that, after they villagers are used to taste-test the burgers, they are dumped back into their villages, given no gratitude and left to rot for the rest of their lives, while the company rakes in the millions from the new advertising campaign. Huzzah for commercialism, huzzah... | |
Why test for those areas. Do they have specific plans to open Burger King restraunts in the hard to get areas. | |
Both McDonalds and Burger King produce nothing but shit-burgers devoid of nutritional value, but both types of burger take away hunger for half an hour - maybe a full hour, if you get fries too. Regardless of the motives BK had, the Romanians got a free quasi-meal. | |
The problems people have are (A) that it's a mockery of an "experiment". The best people to compare food would be food critics, but no real food critic would willingly eat something from Burger King, so they go the other way and pretend that never having tasted a burger before makes you a better judge than someone who has - which, of course, is a laughable notion. And (B) that it's a mockery of the situations in those areas; the money used in setting up this campaign would be better put to use in real, self-replenishing food sources, or any other materials they might need. It's meaningless from any angle. | |
From what I can tell they're only doing it to show that hungry people who don't know sh** about burgers like theirs better than McDonalds. It's all done to make money, not charity. | |
Break - BK doesn't owe the people in those areas a thing. Spending a million in a silly campaign, if that's what they want to spend their money on, is fine. They don't have any reason to spend a million on food/water for those people. My "what's the problem" comment was aimed at the people decrying this as "sick" and so on. | |
I think it's the most retarded ad campaign ever. "We found people who have never had a burger, then gave them a Big Mac and a Whopper. Guess what they chose?" | |
Yea it's a dumb campaign but I really don't think these are starving people. Seriously just because a place has never seen/heard of/ eaten a burger doesn't necassarily mean that they are starving. | |
I buy food from them and this is how they repay me, giving my food to poor people who would have been better off not knowing the world of fast-food. Well that's just great. I heard Coke where doing the same with villagers from the Amazon. | |
Yeah I'd be interested to know if these "poor villagers" were actually starving, or if they were just living like an average farmer of their region.
Wanna sell that computer your posting on and send the cash to em? EDIT:
I couldn't find reference to "starving" or "Africans" in the article. I believe they tested it in Greenland, Thailand and Romania. I don't think any of those places have a high population of Africans. | |
You guys are being awfully presumptuous-- that, or you are all a part of Burger King's marketing department. For all you know, Burger King is supplying those people with free Burgers for the rest of their lives. Yes, it's most likely a marketing campaign first an a humanitarian effort second (or maybe third or fourth or not at all)-- but so what? Just because BK gives these guys some free food they're suddenly responsible for their welfare too? Besides, the Whopper kicks the shit out of the Big Mac-- those villagers are getting a real treat. | |
Maybe there's more to this story than the OP suggests but getting starving Africans to taste test food is morally reprehensible. It's the dietry equivelent of giving a man dying of thirst a bath flannel to quench his thirst before turning him round to feck off back the way he came.
Also a very good point, to be fair. | |
They're not starving Africans. They're Transylvanian farmers. | |
| |
First of all, they are Romanian sheep farmers, not African bush-people. Second, you're clearly the type of person to see the glass as "half empty". You make it sound like Burger King is forcing people to taste test their products, when in reality it's just Burger King giving away free food to people who have never had the chance to try a burger. I don't see what is so "reprehensible" about that. | |
Nope, I'm not really the giving type. As for your theory that these might be farmers that aren't poor... hadn't thought of that. Though, a person who's got money to spend would most likely have already tasted a burger, and if they are subsistence farmers, then... well, why would they accept foreign food from strangers? | |
The problem with the "poverty line" is it's subjective. Many of the peoples they are testing on are actually doing quite fine for themselves, by the standards of being alive and fed that is. They aren't starving constantly or this would be cruel and subject to investigation. | |
Tomato / tomato. | |
Agreed. | |
Yeah I wouldn't either lol, just a lighthearted dig. As for the money to spend, there are an awful lot of places where, as the article said, they don't even have a word for burger, let alone food courts as we understand them. Accepting food from strangers? Well I imagine that a small sum of local currency was probably exchanged for a result. | |
Damn, I thought this was an article about those underage strumpets they have selling you the things. I can't eat burger king. Last time I tried, I spent the first half of the next day between the toilet and the sink, with the expulsion from both ends being of equal consistancy. I didn't even eat or drink that much the night before, but I had liquid blasting out my mouth with the pressure of a burst watermain. I could feel my cheeks being stretched as this liquid poured out of me. The rest of the day was spent wrapped in a blanket while hallucinations of scientists argued whether to end the experiment or not. Which sucks, 'cause that was about the only non-pizza fast food place I could stomach. I'm down to mcnuggets if I don't want to wait for pizza. | |
"It's outrageous," Sharon Akabas of the Institute of Human Nutrition at Columbia University, told the New York Daily News. "What's next? Are we going to start taking guns out to some of these remote places and ask them which one they like better?" That is another paragraph from your linked article. This woman is psychotic and over dramatic. From what I've seen of the commercial, at the very least these people got a few day vacation at a hotel in a large city. At BK's expense, I'd take that just for the experience if I was in their situation. | |
well the key word here is taste test I meen what are these people guine pigs? | |
Heh, don't worry about it. Text is quite hard to use when it comes to emotion. As for the farmers, I'm guessing that, like you said, these farmers are getting paid for it. The whole thing seems like a waste to me, regardless of what kind of farmer they are, but then, it's probably just me. That, and it's, in my eyes, unfair to make a spectacle out of these people, who are most likely doing this just to feed themselves. It's like getting two hobos fighting over a bottle of methylated spirits. | |
there is nothing wrong with this other than it is humiliating to promote advertisment, there is no profit from suffering here, but rather an elitist commercial scheme | |
I originally thought the title was "Bugger Virgins" and I thought Well thats just inappropriate with either context of the word. That is a very graphic description by the way. I'm going to struggle to enjoy my dinner after it. | |
I'm gonna try to find on Youtube that ancient Tonight With Trevor McDonald episode that put me off nuggets for good... EDIT: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2002/sep/30/foodanddrink That was the best I could find. I'm lazy. The TWTM episode was far more disgusting. | |
Peter Molyneux tried to do the same thing with Fable 2, saying that non-gamers should be the ones to review his game. Besides, give food to a starving man, and OF COURSE he's gonna say he likes it. It's absurd to think that because starving people like a certain type of food, it makes it GOOD food. Besides, Burger King and McDonald's both make pretty disgusting fare. Just saying, the food sucks. | |
The ironic thing is that one of the reasons the people are starving is because the grain in other countries is being used to feed cattle and not people. | |
| (Pages: 1, 2, 3) | |
Extra Punctuation
Experienced Points
MovieBob: Intermission
First Person
Miracle of Sound: Encore
Loading Time
Hexproof
Ask Dr Mark
Backchat
Drinking Games
Escape to the Movies
Escapecraft
Escapist Podcast
Feed Dump
GinxTV
Jimquisition
LoadingReadyRun
Meatbag and Co
Media Sandwich
Miracle of Sound
No Right Answer
Pro-Gamer Gauntlet
Reviews
Tales from the Table
The Big Picture
The Escapist Presents
Trailers
Unskippable
Zero Punctuation
The Darkness II Review
Reckoning Review
Exodus Review
Final Fantasy XIII-2 Review
Scarygirl Review
Amy Review
Critical Miss
Name Game
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/3546969/Burger-King-under-fire-for-Whopper-Virgins-taste-test-challenge.html
To summarize, Burger King has taken people from hungry villages of different countries to TASTE TEST the Whopper. Personally, I think this is a new level of a-hole-ism (for lack of a better word). I'm actually reminded of the South Park Thanksgiving episode where Cartman explains what an appetizer is to a starving African child simply named "starvin' Marvin." What do you guys think? Am I alone in this?