Toy Tuesday: Happy Meals = Happy Kids

I've come across a lot of comments on The Center for Science in the Public Interest proposed lawsuit against McDonald's over their inclusion of toys in Happy Meals, that I wrote about a couple of weeks ago. Whoever they are, they sure know how to get media coverage, but it tends to refute their point of view.


From Bruce Lund on Facebook:

Take toys out of Happy Meals? Whatever is the benefit of that? Toys entertain, inspire, educate and invite thinking and doing. Toys change the world. Frank Lloyd Wrights toy blocks inspired him to become an architect. What if those blocks had been a Happy Meal toy? or not?

Also on Facebook, Jennifer Strauss Richmond adds:

Sadly, McDonald's is able to quote a very high percentage of kids in the US and probably higher internationally that the only toys they have ever had are happy meal toys....

Meanwhile, The Consumerist quotes McDonald's CEO:

CSPI is wrong in its assertions and frivolous in its legal threats... CSPI's twisted characterization of McDonald's as 'the stranger in the playground handing out candy to children' is an insult to every one of our franchisees and employees around the world.

Time Magazine concurs with my view that the whole issue will probably boil down to parental responsibility.

After all, 5-year-old kids aren't driving themselves to the McDonald's pick-up window. Little Stevie and the "unpaid drone army of word-of-mouth marketers" are a powerful force, but should McDonald's be liable for their pestering ways? "The solution is not a lawsuit," says Wilson. "The solution is a two-letter word: no."

Toys make kids happy. It's perfectly appropriate that McDonald's calls them Happy Meals.

The last word should go to Bob Cutler of Creative Consumer Concepts, which makes toys for fast food restaurants, who correctly says "you can't teach a child about making good choices, if you just take away the choices."