It all started when a seafood restaurant in New Sydney, Nova Scotia, decided to let the town know that they are NOT child-friendly:
The local and social media outcry was immediate and effective, and the restaurant issued an apology.
I'm sure not everyone will agree with me, but I feel very strongly that children have a right to be in public spaces. Their parents have a responsibility to keep them from unnecessarily disrupting other people's peace-of-mind, but the really young ones — especially babies — often cry. Deal with it. You were one once, too.
It amazes me what a truly family-unfriendly society we are, when I visit countries where children are cherished by the society as a whole. It seems like a much healthier environment for them to grow up in.
Anyway, kudos to local Subway franchisee Kirk MacRae, who told CBC: "We've had a few [screaming kids] and hope to have a lot more, and don't have any issue with it whatsoever."
A branch of the Subway chain in Angers, France was forced to close recently after a Valentine’s Day special was offered to heterosexual couples only.
The store’s owner put up a poster advertising a meal deal for couples that included a footlong Subway sandwich, a drink and a dessert each for 14 Euros. Bracketed next to the word “couples” were the letters “H/F,” indicating a couple was defined as a man and woman only.
Also on the poster was an asterisk that read: “Discrimination (?) No, the marriage for all law has advanced, but has yet to be ratified by the Senate. Until then, I’ll use my freedom of expression.”
The special offer was apparently made by a rogue franchisee, and spent Subway France spinning on Twitter and Facebook.
On Saturday, when the news had gone global, they even posted in English on their Facebook page:
As we stated in response to many posts yesterday: The SUBWAY ® brand is strongly committed to maintain the values of diversity and inclusiveness in its restaurants around the world and does not endorse in any discrimination of any kind . , we apologize to all the people being offended by individual initiative to promote Valentine's Day a restaurant in Angers, France. All SUBWAY ® restaurants are owned by franchisees and are managed independently. We work with the owner of the restaurant in order to strengthen our values and company policy.
The French National Assembly recently approved a law that would legalize same-sex marriage and give the same rights to all married couples to adopt children. Although the legislation has met with organized protest, a recent poll indicated that 63% of French citizens support equal marriage.
But not, apparently, that one rogue sandwich artist who caused his brand a massive embarrassment.
Fast food roast beef sandwich chain Arby's has a new logo, a new tagline and a new enemy: Subway.
The ad isn't bad. The logo update, kind of a mess. And the tagline?
This brand evolution is the work of CP+B, who won away the nearly $100 million Arby’s account in February without a review. It was a gift from Arby's Chief Marketing Officer Russ Klein, who was the one who hired CP+B to rebrand Burger King in 2004.
Klein left BK in 2009, and CP+B (according to former partner Alex Bogusky) fired the $300 client two years later over creative differences. However, the joint statement issued by agency and client stated, "We are incredibly proud of all that we have accomplished together, but have mutually decided that now is the right time to part ways. We are fans of each other’s work and wish each other much success in the future."
The edgy CP+B work for BK was legendary, going viral and causing other creatives to turn green. But it failed to stop a steady decline in sales.
CP+B certainly can’t bear all the fault for BK’s inability to grow, but management clearly decided that the agency has had its shot. And has missed. The chain reported a 2.3% decline in worldwide same-store sales for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010. The brand advanced some in Europe, but in the U.S. and Canada sales decline 3.9% for the year. Wendy’s is building; McDonald’s is cruising. BK has been falling behind.
In short, the advertising didn't work. And the vultures were quick to circle the once-untouchable creative shop.
Crispin was the sexiest ad agency in the country. It had been named “Agency of the Year” at the Clio Awards for two years running. It was designing enormous campaigns for well-known brands like Volkswagen and Burger King. And yet the more accolades Crispin received (Ad Age judged it the No. 1 agency of the decade at the end of 2009), the more my distaste for the outfit sharpened. Crispin’s raunchy, bro-focused vibe rubbed me all the wrong ways, targeting the lowest common denominator with campaigns that valued provocation above substance and casual cruelty above inclusiveness.
Now, the same marketing chief has brought CP+B over to Arby's to try a new strategy. Instead of differentiating by cool factor, Arby's is firing a very focussed shot across the bow of Subway, the top seller in the "sandwich" category of American fast food chains.
It's a solid message for a one-off campaign, if people end up caring where their meat is sliced. Here in Canada, unsanitary high-speed factory slicing of Maple Leaf cold cuts in 2008 was found to be the cause of a listeria outbreak that killed 22 people. So processing matters.
But what exactly is Arby's beef? Their site lists the ingredients of their roast beef as "Beef, water, salt, sodium phosphate." However, there is an older ingredients list circulating that reads "Trimmed Boneless Beef Chunks (Minimum 70%) Combined With Chopped Beef For a Maximum of 12% Fat. Contains up to 9.0% of a Self-Basting Solution of Water, Salt, Sodium Phosphate."
They are also serving more and more turkey, which is officially described as "Turkey Breast, Turkey Broth, Contains 2% or less of the following: Salt, Brown Sugar, Modified Food Starch,
Dextrose, Sodium Phosphate."
Arby's has had its share of urban legend headaches about the quality of its meat, including a tenacious one that claims the beef arrives at the restaurant in gelatinous form. While the latter is only a hoax, basing their entire brand on "slicing up freshness" really could bite them in the buns if it draws too much attention to the quality and processing of their beef or turkey.
And now they've given Subway a reason to embarrass them.
Russ Klein is willing to bet again on CP+B. But I have to wonder why.
If real, this is pretty weird. According to a post on Ads Of The World, it's a Subway campaign for DDB Puerto Rico.
Weirdness aside, there are two things about this campaign that bug me:
First, what fast food brand in its right mind would want their logo associated with disgusting, smelly, garbage trucks and bins? Even with the "feed them better" tagline, it's bound to cause some visceral negativity around the brand.
Second, Subway is hardly health food. According to their site, even a 6" version of their tuna, Italian, and pizza subs have almost 500 calories. (Specialty six-inchers like Big Philly Cheesesteak, Buffalo Chicken, and Chicken & Bacon Ranch Melt have 500 or more.)
At McDonald's, a Big Mac is more calorie-iffic, sure, at 550, but the Quarter Pounder w/Cheese is 520, and a regular hamburger (does anyone eat those?) is just 250 cal.
Sure, you can go all Jared and get a low-fat turkey sub with no cheese and mayo. But McDonald's also sells salads. The point is that you can get an Angus Bacon & Cheese (790) with fries and a Coke (note that all numbers on the McSite are "small only") or you can get a footlong Big Philly Cheesesteak (1000) with chips and a Coke. Both meals are arterially terrifying crap.
So where does Subway get off being all less-junkier-than-thou?
Ads of The World shared this new Subway ad on their Facebook Page:
Compelling and memorable visuals. And it's hard for me to come to the defence of McDonald's, etc., on this account, but Subway really stretches the boundaries of deception.
Here's the issue: they compare grease used in cooking things like fries to the fat that's in a small sub, and then show hamburgers on a grill as where it ends up. What?
Look, hamburgers are junk food, but the fat in a burger has little to do with a fast food restaurant's waste oil. And deep fried foods, when cooked hot enough, do not absorb a great deal of it (otherwise, they'd have to refill their fryers continuously).
My point here is not that McDonald's or Burger King deserves defence. It's that Subway is fast food too.
Sure, you can get a 6" ham on whole wheat without cheese, mayo, or any topping but veggies (6g of fat). You can also order a salad at McDonald's. Big whoop.
But what do you get at Subway? A 12" meatball marinara (44g fat)? Spicy Italian (56g)? ...Tuna (60g)?
Meanwhile, the dreaded Big Mac has 29g of fat. In other words, less fat than a 6" Subway tuna sub. (Large fries add another 27.)
More fat than a Big Mac and large fries. (via Flikr)
Everyone should eat better. And I'd often far rather eat a sandwich than a burger. But Subway should stop overplaying its hand and admit that it, too, is making people fat.
