I think this post is a bit extreme. I'm not sure each scene is 1 second long, but even if it was, my brain can follow what the ad was intended to do, and like someone said, it was predictable. Let's not evil-izing everything done with AI. If you do not agree with the idea or execution is one thing, but implying this is some kind of indoctrination or subliminal message is too much.
I am not a neuroscientist or media psychologist but a humble lawyer. From the perspective of viewing that ad from my sofa as an ordinary consumer my main critique is that it is actually quite boring and the outcome/message too predictable. The disastrous Christmas scenes went on too long , the theme was overplayed and became tedious, and McDonalds coming to the rescue was obvious from the outset.
I don't know the extent to which AI was responsible for the final product as there is reference to a hard working production team. But regardless of their respective input the ad was disappointing and eminently forgettable.
Luiza, I love your posts, and most of the time, I feel your views align with mine on many topics. However, this one is not. First, I wonder if you are familiar with neuromarketing. As a neuroscientist and media psychologist, I have been at the forefront of research on how the brain responds to persuasive stimuli. From a neuromarketing lens, the critique of McDonald’s AI ad reflects a flawed assumption: that persuasion depends on logical storytelling and conscious processing. This belief places the rational brain, the slow, analytical, and deliberate system (also known as system 2), at the center of decision-making. But neuroscience says otherwise.
The ad’s one-second scenes and chaotic visuals may seem to defy logic, but logic is not what drives most human behavior. The rational brain may analyze content, but it’s the primal brain that decides, the fast, emotional, and wordless processing hub (also known as System 1). Demanding continuity or storytelling structure presumes the viewer is reasoning through the ad, but the brain doesn’t work that way under most conditions. I have tested this on thousands of messages during my long career in the field. I also teach neuromarketing AI at Johns Hopkins.
Thus, I believe that what truly matters is whether the content captures attention and triggers emotion, regardless of traditional narrative form. What this means is shocking and often controversial: viewers may consciously dislike the ad, but their subconscious reactions determine its effectiveness. Judging it solely on conscious discomfort ignores the far more powerful role of unconscious, emotional processing.
The primal brain, not logic, is the gatekeeper of attention, emotion, and ultimately, decision-making.
So I determined to spend my whole Christmas in Macs and miss out on the joy of being with my kids and grandkids and close friends. Not only is it not engaging but profoundly absurd that we would think macs offers a joyous alternative. Maybe celebrate connectiveness and place macs at the centre of that. Maybe people gathering on a storming night and being comforted in the company of others. It’s not just poor use of Ai but lacks relatedness.
Ahh, McDonald's simply wants to continue to poison you with its slop! Just turn it off, or turn the sound down, which I do with every advertisement. And stop eating McDonald's, it terrible food.
There are a lot like video memes just all edited together. And I guess it’s supposed to be funny, but it just makes the holiday look like a series of disasters. What’s funny about that?
I think this post is a bit extreme. I'm not sure each scene is 1 second long, but even if it was, my brain can follow what the ad was intended to do, and like someone said, it was predictable. Let's not evil-izing everything done with AI. If you do not agree with the idea or execution is one thing, but implying this is some kind of indoctrination or subliminal message is too much.
I am not a neuroscientist or media psychologist but a humble lawyer. From the perspective of viewing that ad from my sofa as an ordinary consumer my main critique is that it is actually quite boring and the outcome/message too predictable. The disastrous Christmas scenes went on too long , the theme was overplayed and became tedious, and McDonalds coming to the rescue was obvious from the outset.
I don't know the extent to which AI was responsible for the final product as there is reference to a hard working production team. But regardless of their respective input the ad was disappointing and eminently forgettable.
Given the Luigi Mangione trial proceedings, I'd suggest "Hiding out in McDonalds" is not their best ad work either.
Luiza, I love your posts, and most of the time, I feel your views align with mine on many topics. However, this one is not. First, I wonder if you are familiar with neuromarketing. As a neuroscientist and media psychologist, I have been at the forefront of research on how the brain responds to persuasive stimuli. From a neuromarketing lens, the critique of McDonald’s AI ad reflects a flawed assumption: that persuasion depends on logical storytelling and conscious processing. This belief places the rational brain, the slow, analytical, and deliberate system (also known as system 2), at the center of decision-making. But neuroscience says otherwise.
The ad’s one-second scenes and chaotic visuals may seem to defy logic, but logic is not what drives most human behavior. The rational brain may analyze content, but it’s the primal brain that decides, the fast, emotional, and wordless processing hub (also known as System 1). Demanding continuity or storytelling structure presumes the viewer is reasoning through the ad, but the brain doesn’t work that way under most conditions. I have tested this on thousands of messages during my long career in the field. I also teach neuromarketing AI at Johns Hopkins.
Thus, I believe that what truly matters is whether the content captures attention and triggers emotion, regardless of traditional narrative form. What this means is shocking and often controversial: viewers may consciously dislike the ad, but their subconscious reactions determine its effectiveness. Judging it solely on conscious discomfort ignores the far more powerful role of unconscious, emotional processing.
The primal brain, not logic, is the gatekeeper of attention, emotion, and ultimately, decision-making.
So I determined to spend my whole Christmas in Macs and miss out on the joy of being with my kids and grandkids and close friends. Not only is it not engaging but profoundly absurd that we would think macs offers a joyous alternative. Maybe celebrate connectiveness and place macs at the centre of that. Maybe people gathering on a storming night and being comforted in the company of others. It’s not just poor use of Ai but lacks relatedness.
This looks like McDonald's EU which is much different from McDonald's US as anyone with global experience can attest.
Ahh, McDonald's simply wants to continue to poison you with its slop! Just turn it off, or turn the sound down, which I do with every advertisement. And stop eating McDonald's, it terrible food.
There are a lot like video memes just all edited together. And I guess it’s supposed to be funny, but it just makes the holiday look like a series of disasters. What’s funny about that?