: The exhortation was to 'get a life and some facts', yet anyone can see that the response contained no facts at all. Now whether you call it 'exploitation of children' or not, the type of advertising that McDonalds employs is no different to virtually all advertising to children. So McDonalds is certainly no more 'disgraceful' in this regard than the rest of the world. So there is no point to be made in the first place.I think it is fairly easy to tell when exploitation of children is occuring and when it is not. I've read a few of your posts and I've noticed that whenever you want to debunk a specific claim, you label it "subjective" and therefore not worthy of debate. There is a logic error here, "faulty premise." Dismissing claims not to one's liking is the sign of a weak mind.
As to the original message, one of the first things I read the first time I visited this site was "We don't tell you what to think: We give you information and let you decide for yourself." Certainly, there is much editorial work on this site, but isn't about half of this site court transcripts? Besides, if your mind is as sharp as you think it is, shouldn't you be able to make an informed opinion in spite of propaganda?
--
McSpotlight: For the vast majority of this site; yes, we are definitely anti-McDonald's; it's our reason for existing. However, we do not create facts; everything here has been reported or said somewhere else; for the major points we cite references.
(In the Debating Rooms, we try to moderate everything in as unbiased a way as possible.)
