Burger Kings Whopper Neutrality

Burger King created a video on Whopper Neutrality to raise awareness on what the issue of net neutrality is all about. Some people love the ad. Some people hate the ad. I think it's kind of brilliant advertising. It's a great way to get people to talk about your brand. Politics is HOT right now. People are full to the brim with political opinions.

Of course, there are many people who are pro-corporations over any regulations who might be offended by Burger King making this pro-socialist video. I imagine some people will pronounce they will no longer eat at Burger King because of this video. I think that's really interesting too. I guess the execs at BK choose to run the ad regardless of the risks:



Thoughts? Does it represent net neutrality well? Is it a good or bad advertising strategy for BK?

a reply to: dfnj2015


I love it that's great.


That goes to show the value of dumbing it down a little and using props that people can relate to, net neutrality has taken on a whole new meaning to people that endured that, at least the ones who didn't lose their # and have a micro aggression.

a reply to: dfnj2015

It's cool, cuz I never eat at BK anyways. I only eat real food.

a reply to: dfnj2015

Is it Burger King that admits to putting dead horses in its meat grinder?

a reply to: dfnj2015

They've been Whopper throttling for years anyhow...

a reply to: dfnj2015

It's an interesting way to explain the topic but I'm not sure if I'm convinced.

Given the example in the video do you think it would be right for the government to step in and dictate how BK sells it's burgers?

a reply to: Krahzeef_Ukhar

Yes, if it is to make sure that when you order a whopper, you get what you paid for in a timely manner, and not let a company get away with overcharging or setting a tier for service

a reply to: Krahzeef_Ukhar

Yes, the government has a role in making sure we continue to have free and open markets. Paid-for markets don't work. Burger King is assuming the role of a "market maker" in the video.

a reply to: dfnj2015

I thought the Trump administration had repealed net neutrality and it was all over.

Turns out there's a window of time to overturn the decision. There's also the Washington approach which could be followed by other states if successful.

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: dfnj2015

Is it Burger King that admits to putting dead horses in its meat grinder?

Yuck, dead horses, gross. Why don't they use live horses like everyone else?


I think in the long run, BK will benefit from this but only time will tell. It will be interesting to see if there will be fast food wars on issues such as these. Although location will play a big part in acceptance or not of these types of things.

Okay, I'll be the goober.

We're those actors? Because those seemed like some genuine reaponses.

I'd like to see them come try that routine at the BK on the South side by my house. It would not be televised!

a reply to: dfnj2015

I like the ad.

Some people think the greatest freedom is no government.

Others find government regulations force free entities to act in a fair way.

Who's for removing the government oversight in labeling food? They shouldn't be forced to tell you what you are actually eating, right?

Government does some really really good things.

Net neutrality is one of them.

It's good PR, nothing more or less. They have no reason to care about net neutrality because they don't have much of a stake in it. Who visits BK's website? I doubt very many people do except out of mild curiosity then never visit it again.

I agree with the analogy they're making though, it's right on the nose.

a reply to: Reverbs

It's a very popular line on ATS to say, "Get rid of regulations and let market forces rule." The attrition rate for deaths at work would be astronomical and many of them would be from the child labour force. The tobacco industry would be telling its customers how tobacco is good for coughs..'smoke more!!' Monopolies would be raising prices across the board. They'd be crushing new-starts like Wal-Mart, Google, Microsoft and Apple have been doing. We'd have lead poisoned kids in school, dog # in the streets and littering would be like it was in the 80s.

Not sure if BK have a voice in this neutrality debate, but it's good enough to see the profile being raised.

originally posted by: AttitudeProblem
a reply to: dfnj2015

They've been Whopper throttling for years anyhow...

I've been whopper throtting for years now.

That is a very very clever marketing ploy. Using your product to raise awareness of something that a lot of people don't understand, but put into the context of food, makes it crystal clear. Totally brilliant!

Well, I do believe in net neutrality, but I also see a need to have fast data access available for a price too. My daughter runs a business doing hospital records online and has many employees. She needs to have great internet access available for her maybe twelve employees working there some days. Most days she only has maybe six working at the office, others work from home. She is plagued by slow internet because of people using the internet so much, she is willing to pay more and has the highest package she can get, but when many people are using lots of downloads, her internet slows down considerably, she dumped the last internet provider because it was big and was worse, a sixty megabit does not always produce that rate if lots of people are using it. But the new provider can't give her any preference, she could maybe boost the people she employs if she could get better data through. It doesn't help to get two lines in either, it bottlenecks farther down the line.

They never showed the part where the Government comes in and demands they conduct their business according FCC standards. I’m not sure giving those who have the monopoly on violence more power over the market helps anyone, especially those who want a better burger and are willing to pay for it.

I think a better analogy is the owner of a mall. They lease out space. As a retail store you can lease space from the mall owner. You can open a big anchor store for a lot of money per month and get a lot of traffic. If you're smaller, you can lease out a smaller space. Maybe you don't get any signage outside the building, but your store is listed on the mall directory. For small shop, you might just want one of those little carts and sell you merchandise from there.

Point is, the mall owner is not going to let anyone come in and sell their product for free, nor should they be required to do so. Yeah, it might be the only big mall in the area, but hey, the mall owner deserves to collect some rent.

a reply to: AnonymousCitizen

ISPs aren't really like mall owners though.

Business owners already pay rent (server space) and for business licences (ie go-daddy).

They also already pay fees for the privilege of higher traffic too.

At best, ISPs are doorways to get you to whatever mall you want to get to.

And you already pay for that access.