The Instigator
Randomknowledge
Pro (for)
Losing
24 Points
The Contender
kenicks
Con (against)
Winning
33 Points

"McDonald's are Bad" documentaries dont work.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/19/2008 Category: Health
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 3,609 times Debate No: 1985
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (19)

 

Randomknowledge

Pro

I beleive that it takes a strong person to not do something they know is bad for you but tastes so good. It takes a weak person to succumb to modern literature and media as a credible source to base your personal opinion on. This is what all of the McDonalds documentaries are trying to do. They are technically trying to convince people about how bad the products being sold at McDonalds fast food chains really are. My stand is that these documentaries are a waste of millions of budget dollars because they dont work. McDonalds stock is up .81%, they are cranking out ads like there's no tommorow, and when is the last time you went to a McDonalds and saw it empty? Think about. These Micky D docs dont work. I will elaborate with more proof in my next argument.
kenicks

Con

Randomknowledge, I do agree with you on the fact that although with the release of Morgan Spurlock's Super Size Me, many a' McDonald's are still crowded with hungry, eager customers, waiting to sink their teeth into that sodium-pumped, greasy burger. However, Super Size Me along with many other Fast food documentaries have proved to be productive in major and minor ways. Take Super Size Me; as soon as the film was released, McDonald's quickly withdrew their Super Size campaign, never to be seen again. Take "Fast Food Nation" by Eric Schlosser, which, after being read by Prince Charles of Wales, has inspired the "Slow Food Movement", a project which promotes locally grown, home cooked meals to be served at a family table, rather than choosing the fast food alterate. Slowly but surely, fast food goliaths are taking their hits.
Debate Round No. 1
Randomknowledge

Pro

Hello, Kenicks, and thank you for accepting my debate. You said Take "Fast Food Nation" by Eric Schlosser, which, after being read by Prince Charles of Wales, has inspired the "Slow Food Movement", a project which promotes locally grown, home cooked meals to be served at a family table, rather than choosing the fast food alternate." This has been going on for quite a long time, starting in Canada a few years back. A man was dissatisfied with the local fast food, and the food that was being shipped overseas to his local supermarket. He began a crusade: for two months, he only ate food produced and made within a one hundred mile radius of his home. He dropped weight and was immediately feeling healthier. Fast food is definitely bad for you, and the continuation of the fast food industry and the uprbrigning of the organic industry is in america's future. However, with so many families in poor conditions and with poor amounts of money, fast food is the only option for so many people. It is also the choice for some people who want FAST FOOD, and some healthiness. This is a true story: I was in a boston train station at about 11:30 or 12 at night. A woman goes up to the counter and orders a double cheeseburger, no meat. I conclude that this is definitely unorthodox but still a healthy way of looking at a considered unhealthy establishment.
kenicks

Con

Randomknowlege, I have to object to your "Random Knowledge" on the subject of the Slow Food Movement. Perhaps I wasn't clear enough in my knowledge of it either; Slow Food was actually started in 1986 by Carlos Petrini, as a resistance movement against fast food. As it spread over the years to countries such as Switzerland, Germany, Japan, France, and the "good old USA", it was picked up notice by Mr. Eric Schlosser, who published it in "Fast Food Nation". Upon reading it, Prince Charles was intrigued by it, and became an advocate of the process. Yes, while some lower-income people cannot afford the now-pricy luxuries of fruit, vegetables, and find it easier to stop off at McDonald's for a quick meal, it is clearly not the right choice. Personally, I blame the movement by Big Food to encorporate high-fat, high-sugar, energy-dense low-fiber foods into our daily lives, with the cost of these ingredients being less expensive compared to the healthier ingredients, such as comparing the cooking of french fries in partially hydrogenated vegetable oil (trans fat, less expensive) to cooking them in regular vegetable oil (healthier, more expensive). I'd like to go back to the concept of the McDonald's being crowded most every day. Look at McDonald's numbers. 72% out of McDonald's patrons, 3/4, are considered "Heavy Users". They head over to the Golden Arches at least once a week. 22% of these patrons are classified as "Super Heavy Users", who eat at McDonald's 3-4 times a week or more. 91% of these users are adults, 50% over the age of 30. McDonald's has started its corporate brainwash over about 30, 35, 40 years now, thus, perpetually completely overruled many of these patrons, which will pass down to their kids, etc. 85% of these "Users" are people who's yearly incomoe is under $25,000. Now, after many of these documentaries have been released to the public, many "Once in a while" and "Casual" McDonald's users have shrunk from 6% of their profits to a miniscule percentile under 1. That proves that sensible people have seen the light at the end of the taco. I'd also like to bring up your fact about McDonald's stock, that it had gone up .81% recently. This is most likely due to the fact that Super Size Me and many other documentaries have scared McDonald's into offering "Healthier" choices, masking them in salads and snack wraps that still contain high amounts of saturated fat and calories. This pitiful attempt at masking their true evin Ronald McDonald clown face may have saved them for one day, but it is proof that documentaries have had impact on McDonald's menu's and perspectives, thus working.
Debate Round No. 2
Randomknowledge

Pro

Hello, Kenicks, and thank you for accepting my debate. You said Take "Fast Food Nation" by Eric Schlosser, which, after being read by Prince Charles of Wales, has inspired the "Slow Food Movement", a project which promotes locally grown, home cooked meals to be served at a family table, rather than choosing the fast food alternate." This has been going on for quite a long time, starting in Canada a few years back. A man was dissatisfied with the local fast food, and the food that was being shipped overseas to his local supermarket. He began a crusade: for two months, he only ate food produced and made within a one hundred mile radius of his home. He dropped weight and was immediately feeling healthier. Fast food is definitely bad for you, and the continuation of the fast food industry and the uprbrigning of the organic industry is in america's future. However, with so many families in poor conditions and with poor amounts of money, fast food is the only option for so many people. It is also the choice for some people who want FAST FOOD, and some healthiness. This is a true story: I was in a boston train station at about 11:30 or 12 at night. A woman goes up to the counter and orders a double cheeseburger, no meat. I conclude that this is definitely unorthodox but still a healthy way of looking at a considered unhealthy establishment.
kenicks

Con

Note: Please read the bottom comment posted by Randomknowledge before reading the following argument.

A lengthy debate, Randomknowledge, and you have proved some points to be correct in my own humble opinion: McDonald's doesnt care about what goes into their food, and they dont care how it affects their consumers; just as long as they dont get sued. All they care about is that their consumers keep coming back.

But, I, a mere speck in the world's population, want to make a difference. Ever since I read Morgan Spurlock's "Dont Eat This Book" and watched his documentary, "Super Size Me", I have been disgusted, repulsed, and shocked at what goes on inside McDonald's and what they do to their food and consumers. And I, because of what I've seen in a documentary, have solemnly sworn never to eat in a McDonald's again.

All because of a documentary.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Defenestrator 9 years ago
Defenestrator
nice debate. I think Con won because of the "the documentary changed the menu" argument. Pro might have made a stronger point by qualifying the term "work" that he used in the title of the debate, since Pro did not, any example such as the aforementioned argument Con presented could be shown as "working" and therefore getting my vote.

Although I enjoyed reading both sides, thanks!
Posted by kenicks 9 years ago
kenicks
Maybe so, C-Mach, maybe so. On the flipside, thousands, quite possibly millions of people would also have healthy. less disease-prone hearts and unclogged arteries.
Posted by C-Mach 9 years ago
C-Mach
Seriously, if it weren't for the fast-food companies, making cheap food, more people would be starving right now.
Posted by Randomknowledge 9 years ago
Randomknowledge
Thank you, kenicks, for brining up the facts about the new healthy choices at Mcdonalds these days. Im glad I can debate that with you. McDonalds incorportated Healthy food not becuase they were scared, because they have enough money that they dont care if people think they are scared. They could seriously care less. They did it to follow along with the trened and to raise money for their business. It is all a business, and McDonalds really could care less about its food, as 58% of its projected purposes and commitee's are for managing the money. The rest are for the less important categories, like the cups and plates, the advertising, and oh yeah; i almost forgot. The food. They could care less about the food, although they do put forth an effort to appeal to a "healthy eating generation" and from what I have read, the new healthy foods arent even that good for you. They are following the national trend, a trend to be healthy and to believe all of the hogwash in the 31 prominent health magazines out in the world today. If the world believed that fast food would improve their heart, much like cigarettes were not thought of to be dangerous, but look at the permanent results of them now. In conclusion, McDonalds Docs may be convincing for those very infrequent users but for the heavies, These docs will just be a whisper in the wind about their favorite, comfortable golden arches.
19 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by careless-smith 8 years ago
careless-smith
RandomknowledgekenicksTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by wooferalot101 8 years ago
wooferalot101
RandomknowledgekenicksTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by eyeleapy 9 years ago
eyeleapy
RandomknowledgekenicksTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by cliffsofdover 9 years ago
cliffsofdover
RandomknowledgekenicksTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by towinistosucced 9 years ago
towinistosucced
RandomknowledgekenicksTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by dd906 9 years ago
dd906
RandomknowledgekenicksTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Defenestrator 9 years ago
Defenestrator
RandomknowledgekenicksTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by yahoodeler 9 years ago
yahoodeler
RandomknowledgekenicksTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by workersaregoinghome 9 years ago
workersaregoinghome
RandomknowledgekenicksTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by docargument 9 years ago
docargument
RandomknowledgekenicksTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30