March 5, 2026
wolterke/Depositphotos.com
Does McDonald’s CEO Chris Kempczinski Deserve the Grilling Over His Big Arch Promo?
In a now-viral social media share meant to promote the new McDonald’s Big Arch burger, CEO Chris Kempczinski issued an Instagram video which earned him a great deal of blowback — in addition to several roasts from competitors.
In the video, a smartly dressed Kempczinski describes the Big Arch, pointing out the crispy onions just before delivering his “big bite for a Big Arch.”
“It’s a delicious product,” the McDonald’s CEO declared after showing off a bite that was described as “negligible” by NBC News’ Matt Lavietes, who noted that several competitors had hopped aboard the video to “beef” with the red-and-yellow brand.
Whether the intent was meant to be tongue-in-cheek with his video or not, Kempczinksi soon became a viral figure for his video — and not immediately in a good way. The bulk of online commentary around the video was negative, with common criticisms surrounding the seeming lack of authenticity from the McDonald’s CEO in addition to the corporate-speak in naming the burger a “product.”
‘This almost feels dystopian. He’s acting like he’s afraid of it. And just to call it a ‘product.’ It just feels incredibly alien, makes me second-guess eating McDonald’s,” one user declared. Several others described McDonald’s products as “not real food” and “bio-engineered” in response to these sorts of replies.
Burger King, Wendy’s, WingStop, Mini Roast McDonald’s Over Big Arch Video
Competitor responses — and even some from businesses outside of the food space — were quick to pile on.
Burger King chimed in on Kempczinski’s video, writing “We couldn’t finish it either,” while Wendy’s wrote “We do love a square.” WingStop penned a note reading “Is the big bite in the room with us?” while Mini Cooper’s account wrote “Gonna start test driving our cars 1 metre at a time.”
Burger King went so far as to post an apparent compare-and-contrast video on the day of the Big Arch’s release, one featuring its president, Tom Curtis, taking a large bite of the restaurant’s famous Whopper sandwich with aplomb. The video was captioned simply: “Thought we’d replay this.”
Burger King reps played coy about the timing of the Curtis replay, however, suggesting that “We can confirm that this video was not created in reaction to anything.”
McDonald’s Leans Into Social Media Criticism
McDonald’s, for its part, leaned in to the criticism with a bit of self-deprecating humor. In a Mar. 3 Instagram post, the Golden Arches posted a simple pic of the Big Arch burger with text reading “take a bite of our product” attached — the caption itself reading “can’t believe this got approved.”
Some fans wrote that they enjoyed this positioning on the messaging front as a form of response, but critics continued to grill McDonald’s over the issue. Jack in the Box posted “From one CEO to another: eat your product,” while Wendy’s quipped that “Your CEO views this as a threat.”
Even Uno got involved, writing: “Uno reverse, you first,” while Welch’s Fruit Snacks got a laugh in with “Not y’all clocking yourselfs [crying emoji].”
BrainTrust
Scott Benedict
Founder & CEO, Benedict Enterprises LLC
Pamela Kaplan
Principal, PK Consulting
Mark Self
President and CEO, Vector Textiles
Recent Discussions
Discussion Questions
Do you believe it was wise of McDonald’s CEO Chris Kempczinksi and his team to post the Big Arch promo video in question? Why or why not? Is the resulting criticism fair?
Do you believe there was a degree of intentionality behind the production of this video? If so, what clues would you point to?
Does the sterility of the video and the usage of the word “product” as a stand-in for the food presented reinforce certain existing beliefs about McDonald’s?
Poll
Loading …
Wow. Talk about underwhelming. McDonald’s should have shared the 1,000-calorie burger with some working people who were actually hungry.
He’s clearly not lovin’ it…
Well, he clearly needs some media training, as in how to conduct yourself in a video. Who approved this?
Taking the other side, everyone is a critic and the only time you hear about something is when “the internet goes crazy critical”…this post, while not great, does not deserve all the criticism that got us to this point.
My opinion, but obviously not a newsworthy one.
I don’t get the blowback. Okay, so Chris Kempczinski is not as camera-savvy as the CEO of Burger King. Big deal. Some of the competitor comments are funny, but some are just mean. We can’t all be Brad Pitt. Relax. It’s just a video of a guy eating a burger, not the Oscars. And now I want a Big Mac.
CEO’s should be heard not seen. Neither
Honestly, I don’t know what anyone involved with this was thinking…whatever it was , it didn’t work.
I hate to criticize, but I’m just not sure what they were going for
The backlash to the Big Arch promo video illustrates how carefully brands—especially iconic food brands—must manage authenticity in the social media era. In the video, Chris Kempczinski is shown tasting the new Big Arch burger while discussing the launch, but critics quickly seized on the tone and language used in the clip. Many viewers felt the presentation came across as awkward and overly corporate, particularly when the burger was referred to as a “product,” which some interpreted as sterile, boardroom-style language rather than the kind of food-centric enthusiasm consumers expect from a restaurant brand.
From a business standpoint, the decision to post the video was likely intended to humanize leadership and generate buzz around the launch. In that sense, it did succeed—the video generated widespread discussion and social engagement. But that kind of visibility cuts both ways. When a brand built on comfort food and emotional connection appears overly scripted or corporate, it can reinforce existing perceptions that the company is more focused on process and scale than on the joy of the food itself. The criticism may feel harsh, but it reflects a growing consumer expectation that brand communications—especially on social platforms—feel authentic and unscripted.
There is also a reasonable argument that some degree of intentionality was involved. Executives rarely appear casually in promotional content from a global brand like McDonald’s. The video appears designed to signal leadership involvement in product innovation and to position the launch as a major event for the company. The clues are the staging, the messaging around the product launch, and the distribution through official channels. That said, the execution may have leaned too heavily into corporate language rather than the sensory appeal of the food itself.
Ultimately, the reaction highlights a broader marketing lesson. Consumers want leaders to feel relatable, especially when they are speaking about food, entertainment, or lifestyle products. When the tone becomes overly corporate—or when the product is described in the language of a quarterly earnings call—it can unintentionally reinforce skepticism about authenticity. In the age of social media, the difference between a successful executive cameo and an awkward viral moment often comes down to whether the audience feels they’re seeing a genuine reaction or a carefully scripted corporate message.
Oscar Wilde once wrote: “There is only one thing worse than being talked about, not being talked about.”
Leaving that right there.
Where were the marketers when that “nibbling product” video was made? There were many opportunities to improve that impression. However, any attention is better than no attention.
McDonald’s desperately needs a new burger experience. The Big Mac is a relic of the past. (Said the guy who worked in a McDonald’s in high school and ate my life time quota a long time ago.) The burger choices along any stretch of road in America are abundant, so new and improved was over due. But, was this the right burger, supported by the right marketing? I’m actually tempted to visit a McDonald’s for the first time in decades.
What was McDonald’s objective? If it was to captivate people beyond Gen Zs and across household incomes to get them talking about QSR leaders all week, they nailed it.
Gen Zs were already showing off Drake OVO cups (or proudly sporting BK crowns or gobbling $2 Wendy’s burgers) before viral McDonald’s viral video and rivals’ retorts. Suddenly all age groups have opinions about this category. For the moment, anyway.
More Discussions
Are Family Dollar’s New Micro-Stores Likely To Succeed?
Family Dollar looks for a format change while Dollar Tree pushes multi-price strategy harder.What’s Quince’s Secret Sauce?
How has Quince made such an impact in so little time?Will Digital Rebates Bolster Slumping Alcohol Sales?
Will the issuance of digital rebates help bolster slumping alcohol sales?
Wow. Talk about underwhelming. McDonald’s should have shared the 1,000-calorie burger with some working people who were actually hungry.
He’s clearly not lovin’ it…
Well, he clearly needs some media training, as in how to conduct yourself in a video. Who approved this?
Taking the other side, everyone is a critic and the only time you hear about something is when “the internet goes crazy critical”…this post, while not great, does not deserve all the criticism that got us to this point.
My opinion, but obviously not a newsworthy one.
I don’t get the blowback. Okay, so Chris Kempczinski is not as camera-savvy as the CEO of Burger King. Big deal. Some of the competitor comments are funny, but some are just mean. We can’t all be Brad Pitt. Relax. It’s just a video of a guy eating a burger, not the Oscars. And now I want a Big Mac.
CEO’s should be
heard not seen. NeitherHonestly, I don’t know what anyone involved with this was thinking…whatever it was , it didn’t work.
I hate to criticize, but I’m just not sure what they were going for
The backlash to the Big Arch promo video illustrates how carefully brands—especially iconic food brands—must manage authenticity in the social media era. In the video, Chris Kempczinski is shown tasting the new Big Arch burger while discussing the launch, but critics quickly seized on the tone and language used in the clip. Many viewers felt the presentation came across as awkward and overly corporate, particularly when the burger was referred to as a “product,” which some interpreted as sterile, boardroom-style language rather than the kind of food-centric enthusiasm consumers expect from a restaurant brand.
From a business standpoint, the decision to post the video was likely intended to humanize leadership and generate buzz around the launch. In that sense, it did succeed—the video generated widespread discussion and social engagement. But that kind of visibility cuts both ways. When a brand built on comfort food and emotional connection appears overly scripted or corporate, it can reinforce existing perceptions that the company is more focused on process and scale than on the joy of the food itself. The criticism may feel harsh, but it reflects a growing consumer expectation that brand communications—especially on social platforms—feel authentic and unscripted.
There is also a reasonable argument that some degree of intentionality was involved. Executives rarely appear casually in promotional content from a global brand like McDonald’s. The video appears designed to signal leadership involvement in product innovation and to position the launch as a major event for the company. The clues are the staging, the messaging around the product launch, and the distribution through official channels. That said, the execution may have leaned too heavily into corporate language rather than the sensory appeal of the food itself.
Ultimately, the reaction highlights a broader marketing lesson. Consumers want leaders to feel relatable, especially when they are speaking about food, entertainment, or lifestyle products. When the tone becomes overly corporate—or when the product is described in the language of a quarterly earnings call—it can unintentionally reinforce skepticism about authenticity. In the age of social media, the difference between a successful executive cameo and an awkward viral moment often comes down to whether the audience feels they’re seeing a genuine reaction or a carefully scripted corporate message.
Oscar Wilde once wrote: “There is only one thing worse than being talked about, not being talked about.”
Leaving that right there.
Where were the marketers when that “nibbling product” video was made? There were many opportunities to improve that impression. However, any attention is better than no attention.
McDonald’s desperately needs a new burger experience. The Big Mac is a relic of the past. (Said the guy who worked in a McDonald’s in high school and ate my life time quota a long time ago.) The burger choices along any stretch of road in America are abundant, so new and improved was over due. But, was this the right burger, supported by the right marketing? I’m actually tempted to visit a McDonald’s for the first time in decades.
What was McDonald’s objective? If it was to captivate people beyond Gen Zs and across household incomes to get them talking about QSR leaders all week, they nailed it.
Gen Zs were already showing off Drake OVO cups (or proudly sporting BK crowns or gobbling $2 Wendy’s burgers) before viral McDonald’s viral video and rivals’ retorts. Suddenly all age groups have opinions about this category. For the moment, anyway.