McDonald - The Arthur Page Society

followed through on that promise four years later. In 2006, the FDA proposed legislation
that would ban the use of trans fat oils in restaurants.
Questions for Discussion:
• How could it have helped McDonald’s to take decisive action with nutritional
labeling, canceling the super size option, and replacing trans fat cooking oil prior
to the release of Super Size Me?
• Are there occasions when a company may take a hit on an immediate action in
order to build better business relationships for the future? The Tylenol case can
be mentioned as an example of a company voluntarily taking financial losses in
order to build better business relationships in the future.
• Did McDonald’s lose credibility by promising to change their cooking oil and
then not doing it?
• How can the potential negative impact of changing the taste of their foods with a
change in cooking oil be weighted against the health harms of trans fat cooking
oil and potential legislation against use of trans fat cooking oils?
3. Issues need to be handled by the same principles that guide effective relationship
building--that is with openness, trust, involvement and commitment.
While the strategy of buffering or avoiding criticisms in order to diffuse or
disengage a controversy or debate has its merits, there are also downfalls to such a
strategy. A downfall would be that public relations communications by McDonald’s
appears to be lacking in openness and building trust. McDonald’s appears to have
avoided directly addressing criticisms such as those presented in Super Size Me and Fast
Food Nation. For instance, McDonald’s declined an invitation to appear with Schlosser,
37