As I was reading through some blogs the other day, one thing really caught my eye and made me actually laugh out loud. Apparently McDonalds decided that they want to start a campaign to change a certain definition in the Oxford English Dictionary. The Language Log stated that this term was:
“McJob” -- An unstimulating, low-paid job with few prospects, esp. one created by the expansion of the service sector.
The Merriam-Webster dictionary definition:
Low paying job that requires little skill and provides little opportunity for advancement
Dictionary.com gives the same idea
“McProspects” - - over half of our executive team started in our restaurants.
When someone hears “McDonalds,” they do not automatically think “oh what a great, high paying job I could get there!” Almost any person you walk up to on the street is bound to have a similar idea of jobs at the fast food restaurant as the term “mcjobs” implies. Kids do not aspire from kindergarten wishing to flip burgers onto stale, flat buns at the always nearby fast food joint.
My favorite part about the definition is not that it is limited to McDonalds, but includes other desperate service industry jobs at other fast food places, retail stores, and even the local 7-eleven. Even so, the connotation of mcjob to low end jobs could almost be seen as genius. No one thinks about McDonalds as a job opportunity to get ahead. Many people take poor jobs like this to supplement their bank accounts while either in school or while looking for a better paying job because this was the only place hiring at the time.
If McDonalds really wants to change this word, then they should into consideration their current employees and look at why they are even working at the restaurant to begin with. Perhaps they should do some sort of ethnographic study into the lives of mcjob holders. Whichever path they choose, they should really look into ways to change their reputation. “They” is not limited to McDonalds either; “they” includes all these low end, poorly paying jobs that people are almost forced to take that have poor reputations. Can they show the glory side of mcjobs? Doesn’t someone have to do the dirty work?
6 comments:
I think this is an interesting subject. It never ceases to amaze me how far McDonalds will go to try to keep a clean corporate image. I was first introduced to these type of actions by McDonalds from the 2005 documentary, McLibel. This is particularly funny to me because in this documentary, McDonalds is basically trying to take away these people's right to free speech, which is really along the same realms and they still express this behavior even after the creation of this documentary. Good post!
-Sean
Good post, good links, good comment.
Excellent points were made in this blog on a very interesting topic. We are living in a McDonald's and Walmart world now. Get it fast and get it cheap, just remember "who" you got it from. It's a shame to see that they are trying to even get advertising in dictionaries. However the "McCult" like society we have today may have triggered this whole language bit. If society didn't feel the need to "Mc" everything this probably wouldn't even be a debate. I know I am guilty of " Mc labeling" shoot I've already done it a few times in this comment.
Here's my final tid bit, in the martial arts world there are also cheesey chain schools that aren't worth the flip of a burger in terms of combat instruction. The more serious crowd has dubbed them " Mc dojo's' and we'vebeen calling them that for years!
slow down already, your making me look McBad.
Its funny to think of the way that the mc prefix is going to change. When you consider the dynamic nature of language and the potential for shaping perceptions, its likely to have a meaning--far in the future--that exists completely independent of its original state.
Post a Comment