I’ll close comments here. By all means continue the discussion on the new post.

There instead of a Big Mac it’s possible to purchase a Chicken Maharaja Mac, a Fillet-O-Fish, a McChicken or a McVeggie (with fries) but there appears to be no beef based burgers.

For those with the time it’s interesting to compare MacDonalds sites around the globe.

I’m unable to translate the Chinese menu as it’s written in funny characters that I don’t understand (apart from Coca-Cola).

http://www.mcdonalds.com.cn/

Here’s a list of countries that MacDonald’s have franchises in and the year they commenced in each country.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_with_McDonald's_franchises

There’s also a list of countries where MacDonald’s don’t have a presence but they have an outlet listed for Guantanamo Bay Naval Base (Not available to Cuban Residents).

Perhaps this is a form of torture that should be investigated.

Which is what I’d have thought from a reputable PR firm.

@Kirk Broadhurst: What you say reinforces my comment about McDonald’s being the big fast food chain that haters of big fast food chains love to hate.

If someone has defamed a business or caused them to lose money through malicious or reckless actions, that business is perfectly entitled to pursue legal action. The case would then be considered on its merits. But because the business in this instance is McDonald’s, they’re more likely to be seen as the corporate monsters attacking the little guy.

Curious, eh?

@Bob Bain: I don’t know that a typo takes away from the verisimilitude of the original fake email. I’m sure you’ve seen plenty of poor writing in internal communications!

Yes, “fries” is originally an American English word but it’s the word McDonald’s use.

The Macquarie Dictionary glosses it as:

fries plural noun → French fries.

And that in turn is glossed:

French fries plural noun thin strips of potatoes fried in deep fat; chips. Also, French fried potatoes.

In modern linguistics practice, a dictionary reports on English usage, it doesn’t make value judgements. Here the Macquarie is noting that “fries” is considered standard Australian English usage — because it’s not marked “colloquial” or regional or in any other way which would show limited usage — but it does define it in terms of “chips”, which in turn is glossed in more detail, indicating that “chips” is the term with a longer pedigree.

3. Also, potato chip.
a. a deep-fried finger of potato.
b. a thin slice of potato, fried and salted, usually eaten cold; crisp; potato crisp.

The Macquarie does not consider that words are “better” if they first derive from British English rather than American English. Indeed, the preface goes to some pains to point out that Australian English is its own master, choosing words from many sources.

Are the underpaid workers now instructed to ask “Would you like fires with that ?” rather than “Would you like fries with that ?”

BTW: “fries” is an Americanism. In British countries they are called chips.

I just don’t see why this would have been leaked. It’s not really positive PR for McDonald’s.

“We have spoken to police and are in the process of filing charges against Thorne. We are also speaking with legal regarding a possible law suit.” – this just reinforces a widespread negative perception of Maccas.

Still, in every other way it looks a suitably corporate message. While your point does take a little shine off it, I’m still with it being a genuine memo. For now.