 |
|
|
|||||
CosMcs, the glimmering, retro, space-agey concept restaurant from McDonalds, is no more.� In 2023, McDonalds announced the spin-offbilled as the next frontier for the fast-food chain to test its most otherworldly specialty beverage ideasto a deluge of marketing fanfare. CosMcs was a drive-through-only concept with a pared-down menu of neon-colored drinks and a few snack items. The first CosMcs restaurants opened with lines around the block before the sun was even up. Now, less than two years later, McDonalds is jettisoning the stores back into the ether.� According to a press release published late last week, McDonalds plans to shut down all five of its CosMcs locations (one in Illinois and four in Texas) in late June, as well as delete the restaurants associated app. In the coming months, CosMcs-inspired flavors will be landing in hundreds of U.S. McDonalds locations as part of a wider beverage test. The announcement comes in the wake of McDonalds first-quarter 2025 financial report on May 1, which revealed that the chains sales dropped at the beginning of the year, marking its second consecutive quarter of declines. Experts say there are a few main reasons why CosMcs didnt work out as a stand-alone conceptbut that doesnt necessarily mean the spin-off was a failure for McDonalds.� [Photo: Stacey Wescott/Chicago Tribune/Tribune News Service/Getty Images] Bubble tea, energy drinks, functional soda, oh my! From the beginning, it was fairly clear what McDonalds hoped to gain from CosMcs: an entry point into the speciality beverage category (dominated by players like Starbucks, Dutch Bros., and Dunkin) thats been on the rise in recent years.� As Gen Z has become increasingly interested in beverages like bubble tea, functional soda, and colorful energy drinks, other quick-service restaurants (QSRs) have moved to catch up. In 2024, Starbucks experimented with adding bubble tea to its menu; Dunkin introduced an energy drink lineup; and even Taco Bell opened its own beverage-only spin-off called Live M�s Caf�. Meanwhile, McDonalds beverage offerings have remained largely limited to its soda machines and McCaf� coffee menu (which, interestingly, also originated as an Australian spin-off concept). CosMcs was McDonalds answer to this gap in its offeringsa space to, as the restaurant put it at the time, perform a limited test of otherworldly beverage creations at a safe distance from its main restaurants. Within CosMcs blue-and-yellow beverage test kitchen, the chain was free to trial-run concepts like Tropical Spiceade and Island Pick-Me-Up Punch to a smaller audience of consumers. On the companys first-quarter 2025 earnings report, CEO Chris Kempczinski called this strategy quarantining the complexity in a stand-alone concept. [Photo: Matt Schwerin for The Washington Post/Getty Images] According to Matt Michaluk, executive creative director at the branding agency JKR, CosMcs made sense as a viable innovation for McDonalds. With an increasing share of occasions within QSR now solely drinks-only missions, and the diversification of menus by the big coffee chains, this should be a competitive yet fertile ground for growth, Michaluk says. In spite of that promise, he says, there are three reasons CosMcs fizzled out as a stand-alone: brand contradiction, absence of experience, and decline of hype. To start, Michaluk notes, CosMcs was shaped around a pseudo-nostalgic play on historic McDonalds brand characters, like the oft-forgotten 80s alien CosMc. But the spin-offs menu failed to align with that conceit. Further, the pilot format’s focus on drive-through architecture takes away from the overall brand experience, leaving consumers overwhelmingly underwhelmed. And, to cap it off, he says, Innovations and pilots work best when theyre new, exciting, and highly salient. McDonalds seemingly didnt invest in sufficient marketing efforts to support CosMcs. Hence, the hype died far too quickly. Within weeks of launch, there was nothing more to talk aboutnothing new, nothing to get people to come back. [Photo: Matt Schwerin for The Washington Post/Getty Images] Why CosMcs hasn’t failed yet Michaluks assessment might seem like a fairly bleak one, but Danny Klein, editorial director of the trade publication QSR, says the failure of CosMcs as a stand-alone doesnt necessarily equate to a failure for McDonalds business.� From its inception, Klein says, McDonalds likely viewed CosMcs as more of a test run for a potential beverage expansion on its main store menus than a restaurant in its own right. Now that CosMcs recipes are rolling out across stores in the U.S., it appears that the initial experiment was a success.� Hundreds of locations are going to start testing [CosMcs beverages], and I think from the general McDonald’s system standpoint, a beverage extension is what they all wanted, Klein says. I don’t think its a failure. People are going to say that because it was such a big deal, and then it just flamed out into the universe. But in my opinion, it was always a marketing test with the potential to be something else, and that just didn’t materialize. In addition to broadening the availability of CosMcs beverages, McDonalds also announced last week that it would create a new beverage category team dedicated to gaining share in the space. As Kempczinski told investors in early May, There’s a lot of growth that we see in beverages, and the profitability of beverages is very attractive, adding, frankly, we think there’s more that we can be doing to capture our fair share of that. Ultimately, Klein says, the true test of CosMcs will be whether the average McDonalds customer is interested in supplementing their Big Mac and fries with a Sour Cherry Energy Burstor if they choose to stick with a plain old Coke.
Category:
E-Commerce
This week, JAMA Internal Medicine published the results of a large new study that tracked mothers health from 2016 to 2023. It found that maternal mental health declined significantly over the past seven years. The crisis we regularly write about in Two Truths, my best-selling Substack on womens and maternal health, is now being reported in one of the world’s most respected medical journals. Which journals matter I read the story with interestnot just because I write about womens health for a living, but because I still pay a little bit more attention when I see JAMA in a headline. When I started my career as a health journalist at Mens Health magazine in 2011, we were quickly taught which medical journals mattered most. The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM). The Lancet. JAMA. These were the powerhouses. When research appeared in one of them, it carried weight. It still does. {"blockType":"creator-network-promo","data":{"mediaUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2015\/08\/Two-Truths-single.png","headline":"Subscribe to Two Truths...","description":"a newsletter that explores the many truths of motherhood through news round-ups, trend reports, and expert-backed deep dives on topics that matter to moms. To learn more visit twotruths.substack.com","substackDomain":"https:\/\/twotruths.substack.com","colorTheme":"salmon","redirectUrl":""}} The maternal mental health study published this week found, among other things, that in 2016, 1 in 20 mothers rated their mental health as poor or fair. In 2023, that figure rose to 1 in 12. The research underscored the need for immediate and robust interventions in mothers mental health. Not a niche issue The study wasnt perfect; it was cross-sectional (meaning it examined women at different points versus following them over time) and it relied on self-reported healtha far from flawless strategy. Still, its presence in JAMA Internal Medicine signals what I know and what you know to be true: Maternal mental health is not a niche issue. Its national. Urgent. Undeniable. As my friend and trusted source Dr. Catherine Birndorf, cofounder of the Motherhood Center, told The New York Times, We all got much more isolated during COVID. I think coming out of it, people are still trying to figure out, Where are my supports? The sad truth is that theyre still missing; were actively fighting for them over at Chamber of Mothers. Corrupt vessels But heres the thing that really caught my attention in all of this: Earlier this week, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. suggested potentially banning federal scientists from publishing in leading medical journals, calling The NEJM, The Lancet, and JAMA corrupt vessels of Big Pharma. He proposed creating government-run journalsones that would anoint scientists with funding from the National Institutes of Health. Its true: Leading medical journals do accept advertising and publish industry-funded studies. There is also a long history of criticism surrounding the influence of pharmaceutical companies in academic publishing. Kennedys concerns are not new. Whats also true is that these journals disclose their funding, have rigorous peer-review processes (where independent experts, usually leaders in a field, assess the research and flag concerns), and have low acceptance rates. They publish research that changes the way medicine is practiced globally, informs policy decisions, and protects patients, particularly women and mothers. (The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendations on breast cancer screening, which many clinicians follow, have been published and updated in JAMA; The Lancet regularly highlights maternal mortality disparities; The NEJM has published large-scale trials on critical womens health issues, from cardiovascular disease to hormone replacement therapy.) Program terminated And heres something else you need to know: Last week, I interviewed a leading physician and expert on gestational diabetes at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston. She shared a statistic that surprised me (sometimes hard to do when Ive been reporting on health for 15 years): Up to one-half of women who have gestational diabetes in pregnancy go on to develop type 2 diabetes within 5 to 10 years of giving birth. The landmark study that laid the groundwork for understanding diabetes prevention in high-risk groups, including women with a history of gestational diabetes? It was called the Diabetes Prevention Program, and it was first published in The NEJM in 2002. Recently, under Robert F. Kennedy Jr.s leadershipan administration that claims to be committed to ending chronic illnessthat program was terminated. Holding institutions accountable Im not a doctor, scientist, or researcher. Im trained as a health reporter. And I trust that trainingjust as I trust the countless physicians and researchers Ive interviewed over the years, many of whom have spent their careers trying to get their work published in the most rigorous medical journals out there. As a journalist, I believe in holding institutions, including medical journals, accountableespecially when it comes to conflicts of interest. Thats part of the job. But this administration has attempted to infuse a tremendous amount of chaos and confusion into a whole host of topics, health included. Health is nuanced. So is science. But lets be clear: Suggesting that medical research be limited, controlled, or replaced by in-house publications is dangerous. Defunding evidence-based programs that serve high-risk groups, including mothers, is backward. Supporting high-quality, peer-reviewed research should be the bare minimum for anyone who cares about womens health. Canary in a coal mine In their report, the authors of the new JAMA Internal Medicine study wrote, Our findings are supportive of the claim made by some scholars that maternal mortality may be a canary in the coal mine for womens health more broadly. Its a statement that places maternal health where it belongs: at the center of womens health. As Dr. Tamar Gur, director of the Soter Womens Health Research Program at Ohio State, told The New York Times, Now I have something I can point towhen Im seeing a patient and say, Youre not alone in this. This is happening nationally, and its a real problem. Thats the power of credible, peer-reviewed research. Thats where real change starts. {"blockType":"creator-network-promo","data":{"mediaUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2015\/08\/Two-Truths-single.png","headline":"Subscribe to Two Truths...","description":"a newsletter that explores the many truths of motherhood through news round-ups, trend reports, and expert-backed deep dives on topics that matter to moms. To learn more visit twotruths.substack.com","substackDomain":"https:\/\/twotruths.substack.com","colorTheme":"salmon","redirectUrl":""}}
Category:
E-Commerce
Parents used to be freaked out when kids were reading romance novels or Horatio Alger books. It seems quaint now, when so many parents (and teens!) are concerned about the effects of social media and screen time. But it speaks to a universal truth: The stories we learn have the power to shape our lives. Stories are among the oldest forms of teaching. They dont just shape our thinking, they actually affect us at a neural level. This is especially true for kids: The entertainment that children consume during their most formative years plays an important role in shaping who they become and how they relate to the world around them. Now, however, some of the most reliable sources for high-quality childrens media are on the chopping block with the administrations threat to cut federal funding of�PBS, accounting for 15% of its funding, which will only limit access to valuable programming that can impact future generations. In fact, the U.S. Department of Education recently notified the Corporation for Public Broadcasting about the immediate termination of its Ready to Learn grant, taking away the remaining $23 million of a grant that was set to end on September 30. PBS has received this grant every five years for the past 30 years, and it accounts for one-third of PBS Kids annual budget. There have been many studies on the immediate effects of media on children, from specific learning goals to impacts on self-esteem. But one thing that hadnt been measured extensively was how much those learnings persist over time. Thats why my colleagues and I at the Center for Scholars & Storytellers at the University of California, Los Angeles, studied the long-term impact of Daniel Tiger’s Neighborhood, a modern-day Mister Rogers-inspired program. The show, which we weren’t involved with, was developed in close collaboration with child-development experts to purposefully and thoughtfully model social skills and emotional regulation tools for young kids. [Image: Fred Rogers Productions] To see how much teens had learned from watching Daniel Tiger’s Neighborhood as younger children, we conducted a mixed-methods study surveying 150 teenagers across the United States. The results were striking: 57% remembered learning strategies from the show, like understanding and managing emotions, academic success, and behavioral regulation. And one in five told us they still use those techniques (like deep breathing and other calming strategies) when theyre upset today. Interestingly, the teens in our study didnt just recall facts or songs. They also remembered feelings of safety and warmth. Many associated watching the show with solace during difficult moments in early childhood. We know that storytelling can provide frameworks for coping during times of uncertainty. And in fact, this kind of comfort is increasingly important to kids today: In our research, we found that young people ages 10 to 24 now rank safety as a higher priority than having fun. Media can be a powerful way to support kids mental health: One study found that a popular hip-hop song featuring a story that has a man calling the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline led to increased calls to that hotline and a reduction in suicides. But given our nation’s ongoing youth mental health challenges, we cant leave this to chance: Storytelling grounded in researchdesigned to meet children where they are emotionally, cognitively, and sociallyis more needed than ever. These kinds of stories can act as a form of early intervention, providing children with tools that can support their psychological well-being for years to come. When Fred Rogers testified in front of Congress back in 1969, he said, If we in public television can only make it clear that feelings are mentionable and manageable, we will have done a great service for mental health. Our study of Daniel Tiger’s Neighborhood provides concrete evidence supporting his prescient statement, showing how quality children’s programming can indeed make feelings mentionable and manageable, thereby serving mental health. Nearly 60 years later, public television continues to be a haven for thoughtfully produced programs that have a research-backed positive impact on kids. PBS Kids is one of the rare organizations that intentionally creates media in deep collaboration with researchers who study child development. Another study we published found that movies featuring more character virtues like gratitude or empathy make more money at the box office. This is a real opportunity for the rest of the media industrypublic media has shown us where the bar should be: If we give young people stories that honor their feelings, and help them navigate an increasingly complex world, the positive impact will last for years to come. Were not going back to the days of romance novels and Horatio Alger for teens: Screens are here to stay. But the real question is: What kinds of content are we putting on them? The majority of the media industry is motivated by profit, which means putting kids first is not always the objective. This is exactly the reason we need to continue to fund public media. Because when we prioritize and fund thoughtful, research-based content that meets kids where they areand shows them where they can gowere not just creating better programming. Were building the foundations for better mental health, a stronger society, and a healthier democracy.
Category:
E-Commerce
Mark Zuckerberg recently suggested that AI chatbots could combat social isolation by serving as friends for people experiencing loneliness. He cited statistics that the average American has fewer than 3 friends but yearns for as many as 15. He was close: According to a 2021 report from the Survey Center on American Life, about half of Americans have fewer than four close friends. Zuckerberg then posited that AI could help bridge this gap by providing constant, personalized interactions. I would guess that over time we will find the vocabulary as a society to be able to articulate why that is valuable, he added. Loneliness and social disconnection are serious problems. But can AI really be a solution? Might relying on AI for emotional support create a false sense of connection and possibly exacerbate feelings of isolation? And while AI can simulate certain aspects of companionship, doesnt it lack the depth, empathy, and mutual understanding inherent to human friendship? Researchers have started exploring these questions. But as a moral philosopher, I think its worth turning to a different source: the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle. Though it might seem odd to consult someone who lived over 2,000 years ago on questions of modern technology, Aristotle offers enduring insights about friendshipsand which ones are particularly valuable. More important than spouses, kids, or money In his philosophical text Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle maintained that true friendship is essential for eudaimonia, a Greek word that is typically translated as flourishing or well-being. For Aristotle, friends are not just nice to havetheyre a central component of ethical living and essential for human happiness and fulfillment. Without friends, no one would choose to live, he writes, though he had all other goods. A solitary existence, even one of contemplation and intellectual achievement, is less complete than a life with friends. Friendship contributes to happiness by providing emotional support and solidarity. It is through friendship that individuals can cultivate their virtues, feel a sense of security and share their accomplishments. Empirical evidence seems to support the connection between friendship and eudaimonia. A 2023 Pew Center research report found that 61% of adults in the U.S. say having close friends is essential to living a fulfilling lifea higher proportion than those who cited marriage, children or money. A British study of 6,500 adults found that those who had regular interactions with a wide circle of friends were more likely to have better mental health and be happier. And a meta-analysis of nearly 150 studies found that a lack of close friends can increase the risk of death as much as smoking, drinking, or obesity. Different friends for different needs But the benefit of friendship that Aristotle focuses on the most is the role that it plays in the development of virtue. In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle identifies three tiers of friendship. The first tier is what he calls friendships of utility, or a friendship that is based on mutual benefit. Each party is primarily concerned with what they can gain from the other. These might be colleagues at work or neighbors who look after each others pets when one of them is on vacation. The problem with these friendships is that they are often fleeting and dissolve once one person stops benefiting from the relationship. The second is friendships of pleasure, which are friendships based on shared interests. These friendships can also be transient, depending on how long the shared interests last. Passionate love affairs, people belonging to the same book club, and fishing buddies all fall into this category. This type of friendship is important, since you tend to enjoy your passions more when you can share them with another person. But this is still not the highest form of friendship. According to Aristotle, the third and strongest form of friendship is a virtuous friendship. This is based on mutual respect for each others virtues and character. Two people with this form of friendship value each other for who they truly are and share a deep commitment to the well-being and moral development of one another. These friendships are stable and enduring. In a virtuous friendship, each individual helps the other become better versions of themselves through encouragement, moral guidance, and support. As Aristotle writes: Perfect friendship is the friendship of men who are good and alike in virtue. . . . Now those who wish well to their friends for their sake are most truly friends; for they do this by reason of their own nature and not incidentally; therefore their friendship lasts as long as they are goodand goodness is an enduring thing. In other words, friendships rooted in virtue not only bring happiness and fulfillment but also facilitate personal growth and moral development. And it happens naturally within the context of the relationship. According to Aristotle, a virtuous friend provides a mirror in which one can reflect upon their own actions, thoughts, and decisions. When one friend demonstrates honesty, generosity, or compassion, the other can learn from these actions and be inspired to cultivate these virtues in themselves. No nourishment for the soul So, what does this mean for AI friends? By Aristotles standards, AI chatbotshowever sophisticatedcannot be true friends. They may be able to provide information that helps you at work, or engage in lighthearted conversation about your various interests. But they fundamentally lack qualities that define a virtuous friendship. AI is incapable of mutual concern or genuine reciprocity. While it can be programmed to simulate empathy or encouragement, it does not truly care about the individualnor does it ask anything of its human users. Moreover, AI cannot engage in the shared pursuit of the good life. Aristotles notion of friendship involves a shared journey on the path to eudaimonia, during which each person helps another live wisely and well. This requies the kind of moral development that only human beings, who face real ethical challenges and make real decisions, can undergo. I think it is best to think of AI as a tool. Just like having a good shovel or rake can improve your quality of life, having the rake and the shovel do not mean you no longer need any friendsnor do they replace the friends whose shovels and rakes you used to borrow. While AI may offer companionship in a limited and functional sense, it cannot meet the Aristotelian criteria for virtuous friendship. It may fill a temporary social void, but it cannot nourish the soul. If anything, the rise of AI companions should serve as a reminder of the urgent need to foster real friendships in an increasingly disconnected world. Gregg D. Caruso is a professor of ethics and management and director of the Waide Center for Applied Ethics at Fairfield University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Category:
E-Commerce
The goal for any leader is to build strong and productive relationships with their team and other stakeholders. And the best way to do this is by inspiring their audience every time they speak. This means creating believers with every set of remarks, whether theyre having a brief hallway conversation or delivering a keynote speech. But how? To inspire others, embrace these five fundamentals: 1. ADOPT AN INSPIRATIONAL MINDSET The starting point for becoming an inspiring leader is developing the right mindsetone that is focused not on informing but on inspiring. Information, even when its up-to-date and accurate, lacks the power to move others. Avoid content-rich presentations or conversations full of too many facts. Instead, always be in inspire mode. Inspire mode keeps you away from delivering content-heavy slides or numbing statistics, and instead gets you to engage your audience with your belief or idea. Bring your listeners to the realm of possibilities. 2. LISTEN INTENTLY To inspire others, you need to listen intently. Leaders who fail to listen will not understand their audiences mindset and they wont be able to focus their message so it has maximum impact. There are three ways to listen. First, listen with your body. Face your audience and align your body with the person (or people) to whom you are speaking. Stand or sit up straight. Keep a receptive expression on your face and make strong eye contact. Keep your arms open. This body language will send a message that you care about your audience. Second, listen with your mind. You need to listen for the points the other person is making, and you also need to show that youve heard what theyve said. You might interject phrases like Oh, thats so true or Yes, thats a good point or I agree or Tell me more about that. Such responses show that your mind is engaged and responsive. Third, listen with your heart. When you listen with your heart, you show that you are emotionally engaged. Heartfelt responses include being polite, being sensitive, and using expressions like I share your feelings and That must have been difficult. (For a full discussion of these three ways to listen, consult the chapter Listen, Listen, Listen in my book Speaking as a Leader.) 3. SPEAK WITH A MESSAGE If you want to inspire, you need to speak with a message. Without a big, central idea, you cant expect people to follow you. Your message should be stated at the beginning of your remarks and elaborated on by everything else you say. So, after opening your conversation or speech with a bridge or a grabber, get to your point. If youre giving formal remarks, you might say My message to you is . . . If its a less formal situation, you might say, I believe that . . . Own your message and present it clearly at the beginning. After you state your message, prove it. This requires sharing supporting evidence, usually in two to four points. Youll lift your audiences thinking from what is to what can be. 4. USE STRONG WORDS Inspiring leaders use compelling language. They know that every word testifies to their credibility. A leaders language is confident. They own what they are saying with expressions like I believe, I see, I know, and I care. They avoid tentative language like Im not sure, I dont know, and I cant. They also avoid filler expressions like um and ah. 5. END WITH ACTION Whether you are giving a formal presentation or offering a comment at a meeting, be sure to end your remarks with a call to action. After a job interview, you might say to the candidate, This has been a great meeting. Well be in touch with you shortly. You might conclude a more formal presentation with If we take the steps I have outlined, we will be a much stronger company. I look forward to your support for these initiatives. By ending with a call to action, youll move your audience from the present to the future you envision. You’ll inspire your listeners by taking them from what is to what can be.
Category:
E-Commerce
Sites : [45] [46] [47] [48] [49] [50] [51] [52] [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] [62] [63] [64] next »