Running head: VISUAL ANALYSIS OF “MCCRUELTY”
Visual Analysis of PETA’s “McCruelty” Advertisement
Aaron E. Pacheco
University of Texas at El Paso
1
VISUAL ANALYSIS OF “MCCRUELTY”
2
Visual Analysis of PETA’s “McCruelty” Advertisement
Chickens lie helpless on a conveyor belt. They have been severely beaten, their limbs
broken. The abomination of their treatment is outdone only by the horrors of their fate. Many of
them will be scalded alive by boiling oil, many others’ throats will be slit as they hang upside
down, their bodies broken. All of them suffer. All of them are powerless to do otherwise. They
will ultimately form part of the McDonalds menu. This is the exact issue brought up by this
visual from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, or PETA. Through the text used in the
advertisement and the semi-graphic nature of its images, it seems to suggest that if consumers
knew the truth behind the products they dine on, perhaps they would not be as eager to
participate in their consumption. The visual serves as both an advocate of disapproval and as a
message of it, seeking to communicate with the McDonalds customer base as well as its
corporate personnel through means of its ethos, pathos, and logos.
To begin the analysis of this visual, one must note the background, which appears to be a
brown paper bag resting atop some surface. We then see a pair of realistic chicken feet hanging
upside down rising up from the bottom of the visual. After acknowledging these two
components, we are able to appreciate the centerpiece of the ad, a red rectangle containing the
text “McCruelty I’m hating it” and “it’s mighty cruel” imitating the traditional McDonalds visual
style. Centered between the word “McCruelty “and the phrase “I’m hating it” is the McDonalds
logo forming part of what appears to be a slaughtered chicken, its neck slit and its blood
commencing to pool above the phrase “I’m hating it.” Each of these elements seek to make clear
connections to the McDonalds brand while at the same time advocating a stance of disapproval.
The paper bag background serves as a canvas upon which all the other elements rest and as a
clear reference to the fast food industry which commonly uses bags such as these to hand
VISUAL ANALYSIS OF “MCCRUELTY”
3
customers their order. The text within this visual gives it its orientation by describing not only
the problem but the stance of the author as well.
Purpose
The visual seeks to fulfill two distinct purposes. First, it serves as an agent of advocacy
for a distinct cause. The resulting composite of the linguistic and visual messages functions as a
platform upon which PETA can diffuse awareness of the unethical slaughtering techniques
employed by McDonalds suppliers and express its disapproval of such techniques as well. The
most indicative feature of PETA’s attempt at diffusing information by means of this
advertisement is their utilization of it as a public website’s header. Evidence of their
implementation of this medium as a means to convey dissatisfaction is present in its association
of terms such as “cruelty” and “hate” with the McDonalds brand. Secondly, the advertisement
functions as a message to the McDonalds Corporation. The negative atmosphere created by the
combination of antagonistic text and artwork along with the author’s utilization of the
McDonalds brand’s visual style and logo seem to work in unison as an expression of discontent
targeted at the fast food brand. These two purposes work together to achieve the goal of ceasing
the unethical slaughtering of chicken destined for McDonald’s meals.
Audience
Parallel to its purpose, the audience intended for this visual also diverges into two
separate parties. As an agent of advocacy, the advertisement seeks the support of the general
public, more specifically, it concentrates on the McDonalds customer base. This becomes most
evident when examining the content of the website surrounding the image. Attaining the support
of this group would be logical and essential to the purposes of this visual as it is the very core of
the operations of the brand. Without customers, McDonalds would be faced with two options,
VISUAL ANALYSIS OF “MCCRUELTY”
4
either close its doors or make the changes necessary for its customers to return, both of which
would be beneficial to the PETA agenda. The secondary target of the visual is the corporate
entities within the McDonalds brand. This can be deduced from the advertisement’s mimicry of
the brands style and declarations of disapproval of the brand’s actions. The advertisement
appeals to those in control of the purchase of the chicken in hopes that they will demand a more
humane approach in its processing. It is important to note that McDonalds is the primary target
of this message as the suppliers work for the brand and not the customers directly.
Ethos
The advertisement builds its ethos through a mixture of its artistic style, mode of usage,
and the organization responsible for its creation. Upon looking at the image, the first thing an
audience would notice is its mimicry of the McDonalds logo’s style and its resulting
professionalism. The advertisement’s imitation of the visual cues found within a major
multinational corporation’s logo results in a phenomenon wherein part of the ethos carried by the
brand is transferred to the object bearing resemblances to it. That is to say, McDonalds’ logo is
iconographic, and thus universally recognized. That being the case, an ethical parody of this logo
immediately associates any moral questions that the image may bring about with the
iconographic brand name. The graphic’s visual style also carries with it a professional
component that helps to boost the credibility of its cause. Originally, this image was part of the
header for a website hosted by PETA (www.mccruelty.com). This implementation of it helps to
boost its ethical appeal by highlighting its importance within a major campaign hosted by a
major organization whose ethical stance is almost as widely known as the McDonald’s brand.
The reputation built by its originating organization solidifies the claims and appeals made by the
VISUAL ANALYSIS OF “MCCRUELTY”
5
advertisement. This type of association is the most powerful tool in establishing the visual’s
ethos.
Pathos
The appeals made by this advertisement rest upon a strong emotional component. From
its strong linguistic message to the negative atmosphere it attempts to create, and even its use of
semi-graphic images, the advertisement goes to great lengths to control the emotions of its
audience. There are three essential phrases that make up the linguistic aspect of this visual:
“McCruelty,” “I’m hatin’ it,” and “It’s mighty cruel.” It is important to note the incredibly
powerful feeling of disapproval that these phrases seem to convey in contrast to the usual
cheerful and upbeat phrases used by McDonalds such as “I’m lovin’ it”. The words “hate” and
“cruel” are certainly anything but ambiguous in their meaning. The negative connotation of all
three of these messages is then transferred to the McDonalds brand through the typefaces chosen
by the creator of the visual. The linguistic message forges a negative feeling within the audience
and then ties it to the brand through means of association. This association takes place not only
visually but textually as well. The use of the “Mc” in front of the word cruelty and the
abbreviation of the word “hating” to “hatin’” also resemble the textual approach taken by actual
McDonalds advertisements. Connections such as these help transfer the constructed feelings of
disapproval from the text to the brand itself. The advertisement carries with it virtually no
positive feelings. The feelings created by the combination of all these aspects are the complete
rejection of the entity and all of its practices. This atmosphere motivates the audience to cease
any association with the McDonalds brand.
The explicit nature of the graphics found within the visual is also a vital component of the
advertisement’s emotional appeal. The images contained within carry a strong emotional
VISUAL ANALYSIS OF “MCCRUELTY”
6
component which complements the disapproval created in the text. Images alluding to the
slaughtering of animals will almost certainly convey an extreme sense of sadness for many
people. The audience is meant to feel a sadness or pity for the chicken and in turn react
intellectually and emotionally by disapproving of the McDonalds brand.
Logos
There are few appeals to logic within the advertisement beyond the idea that cruelty is
something worthy of hatred and as McDonalds is employing cruelty it is therefore worthy of
hatred. There is, however, much to be said regarding the construction of the visual and how each
of the five elements of design is utilized to maximize the influence of the appeal and the
efficiency of the communication. Beginning with the use of contrast, every single bit of pertinent
information stands out immediately. By placing all light colored textual elements within the red
rectangle rather than the lighter background the author is ensuring the visibility of his linguistic
message. Similarly, placing this darker rectangle atop a lighter background is effective in
allowing this portion of the visual to stand out. Interestingly enough, however, not all elements
stand out at once. The audience would begin by noticing the main linguistic message
“McCruelty, I’m hatin’ it,” written in white upon the red background. Next, they would notice
the altered McDonalds logo creating the associative effect described above. Following this, their
attention would be drawn to the phrase “its mighty cruel,” followed immediately by the realistic
image of the inverted chicken feet, which follow a color scheme consistent with those used in
crime shows to denote “the victim,” a color scheme that effectively contrasts with the lighter
paper bag background upon which it rests. The visual uses contrast not only to make key
information stand out but to guide the reader as well. All elements are aligned along the center of
the image, demanding greater attention from the observer. While the entire visual relies on
VISUAL ANALYSIS OF “MCCRUELTY”
7
vertical symmetry, the lack of horizontal symmetry is important to point out. All elements are
aligned vertically but all key information is grouped within the upper half of the image. This
invites the audience to read the advertisement using a top to bottom approach which provides
them with the most efficient means of receiving the information. The visual constantly maintains
a consistent style of mimicry persistent on imitating the visual cues set forth by the McDonalds
visual style. The combination of all of these design choices creates an imbalance within this
advertisement between not only regions but elements as well that is used to guide the reader and
provide him with the most logical means of observing the image.
Perpetuations Facilitated by the Visual
This image perpetuates the school of thought that places animal life on par with human
life. This theory assumes that an animal experiences feeling the same way a human does, not
only physically but, to a degree, emotionally as well. They take the position that because animal
life is so similar to human life, animal treatment should be on par with human treatment. This
perpetuation is evident in the content of the advertisement. As an advocate for animal rights,
particularly the rights of chickens being processed by McDonald’s suppliers, the advertisement
makes its stance clear. It’s creating organization frowns upon any technique that could cause any
sort of suffering whether physical or “emotional.” A contrasting point of view would hold
animals at a lower stance. This view would argue that animals do not suffer the same way a
human does, and do not require more humane treatment. The actions associated with this school
of thought, specifically those regarding animal processing is the exact issue this visual seeks to
contest.
The image utilizes a parody-like visual scheme to refer the public to an issue many may
have never considered before due to the convenient nature of processed fast food. It acts as an
VISUAL ANALYSIS OF “MCCRUELTY”
8
vehicle of disapproval on behalf of PETA and seeks to attain the support of the McDonalds
customer base. The advertisement is also delivering a message to McDonalds executives, urging
them to demand better processing techniques for the animals used in their foods, all in an effort
to cease the unethical slaughtering techniques employed by McDonalds’s suppliers. Although the
image exclusively deals with the actions of McDonald’s suppliers, in a deeper sense, the parody
also seeks to appeal that anyone who eats any kind of meat to consider the processing of the
animals they are consuming, and to seek changes accordingly.
VISUAL ANALYSIS OF “MCCRUELTY”
9
VISUAL ANALYSIS OF “MCCRUELTY”
References
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. [Website header for www.mccruelty.com].
Retrieved from http://www.mccruelty.com/default.aspx
10