Burger Virgins

[videonerd250]

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?

 

[Molikroth]

... They're giving out free burgers. What's the problem?

 

[Dommyboy]

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.

 

[GyroCaptain]

Welp, I'm too much of a misanthrope to care too much about this. At the same time, really, what were they thinking?

 

[Molikroth]

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.

 

[videonerd250]

... They're giving out free burgers. What's the problem?

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.

 

[stompy]

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...

 

[Logan Keller]

Why test for those areas. Do they have specific plans to open Burger King restraunts in the hard to get areas.

 

[Molikroth]

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.

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.

 

[Break]

... They're giving out free burgers. What's the problem?

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.

 

[videonerd250]

Why test for those areas. Do they have specific plans to open Burger King restraunts in the hard to get areas.

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.

 

[Molikroth]

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.

 

[tijuanatim]

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.

 

[perfectimo]

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.

 

[Brett Alex]

Seriously just because a place has never seen/heard of/ eaten a burger doesn't necassarily mean that they are starving.

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.

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...

Wanna sell that computer your posting on and send the cash to em?

EDIT:

Maybe there's more to this story than the OP suggests but getting starving Africans to taste test food is morally reprehensible.
Are they going to continue to support the villages when this piss take is all over? I doubt it.

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.

 

[HSIAMetalKing]

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.

 

[The_Deleted]

Maybe there's more to this story than the OP suggests but getting starving Africans to taste test food is morally reprehensible.
Are they going to continue to support the villages when this piss take is all over? I doubt it.

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.

Seriously just because a place has never seen/heard of/ eaten a burger doesn't necassarily mean that they are starving.

Also a very good point, to be fair.

 

[Molikroth]

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.

"It doesn't get much more offensive than this," noted The Inquisitor blog. "If visiting poor people in remote locations, some who would be at best surviving on below poverty levels and throwing a burger in their faces isn't bad enough, it gets better, because they also ask the Whopper Virgins to compare the taste of the Whopper to a McDonalds Big Mac as well.

 

[HSIAMetalKing]

Maybe there's more to this story than the OP suggests but getting starving Africans to taste test food is morally reprehensible.

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.

 

[stompy]

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...

Wanna sell that computer you're posting on and send the cash to em?

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?