When reading an article, you would like to get as much useful information out of the article as possible. It does not make much sense to take the time out of a busy day to read something that you could have found out for yourself. Right? An article that has little known facts and interviews from those involved in the topic are how you really grasp the readers attention and leave them well-informed after reading. The article following the #McDStories failure was quite underwhelming for all of these reasons above.
Although the article did have some sample tweets from unsatisfied customers (which was quite informative), they did not dive into the issue at hand. The article is very vague and does not give little known facts or dig deep to find useful information. Forbes basically told the readers what I’m sure they saw on twitter the night that it happened. They could have added some words from the McDonalds marketing team or something of that nature to make us really understand what was going on from first-hand evidence. The reader needs to know certain details. For example, it would be nice to know exactly how much McDonalds paid to get their hashtag trending. That information brings the reader into the depth of the situation as opposed to just scratching the surface.
Retrieved from Forbes
jordonmanswell 