Survey Says? 'Who Cares!' (Or, Please, No More News About McDonald's Coffee!)
What's with all the "McDonald's coffee is better than Starbucks" survey stuff going around? Evidently, a taste test or two places the coffee from the Golden Arches in a higher position than the ubiquitous chain-coffee house. This started about a month back with this Consumer Reports study, and has been percolating further on recent "stunning revelations" that McD's is going to serve actual espresso as well. One of the most bothersome aspects of this is major news concerns are talking and talking about it. STOP! PLEASE!
(Though we recommend you read The Shot's take on it, and all things coffee, of course)
The type of person that goes to fast food places for coffee is generally looking for caffeine as fuel, not for pleasure or atmosphere. McDonald's is, well, what it is, and the convenience, price, and product additives (be it to coffee beans or burger meat) drive the business. We'll eat the food on a very rare occasion; we'll never again drink the coffee (nor at Burger King, not even for the sake of journalism. We've learned our lesson).
Starbucks customers probably are closer to striking a balance between needing fuel and wanting a better taste and overall experience, but perhaps:
-- haven't discovered the superior quality of a quality local operation,
-- perhaps are not conveniently located near a quality local operation,
-- or think the coffee is great.
And that's okay. Seriously, both SBUX and McD's customers are okay with us. We're not going to begrudge anybody doing what they like. True, we're not huge fans of either one. But no reason for major media enterprises to buy into or rebroadcast the hype.
We find that McDonald's coffee is weak and tastes like styrofoam, and we've long been of the opinion that Starbucks coffee is only sorta okay. See, with Starbucks you start getting into all the Fair Trade/not Fair Trade and union stuff that can make whatever you get there taste a little worse. In a way, we're a little grateful to Starbucks for sort of serving as a bellwether that brought a higher quality of coffee and cafe culture to the forefront of the American consciousness--even if that quality's gone a little by the wayside, and we're ready to move beyond what they've given us. However, even while admitting that Starbucks may deserve this credit, they, as the bellwether, have been also loss leaders, diminishing good coffee down to mediocre levels. We suppose it's obvious we have mixed feelings--let's just sum it up like this: we're not huge fans, but, as SFist Jon once more or less said , "it can do in a pinch."
(Still, we find this new cell phone service to be sort of pathetic)
Silly studies about how one huge corporation's food/drink product is better than the other is an apples vs. oranges comparison, as they are differing products being used for differing reasons. The thought that the magical espresso-making process will be subject to McDonald's food-factory-ism makes us shudder. Even without tasting it, we're confident in saying "sorry, that ain't espresso." And neither one is news; they add up to much ado about nothing.
Long story short: stop polluting our headlines with such garbage. If you big boys want to do some stories about coffee, see who's roasting in your area, see how they are serving it, and help us show the folks taking these surveys just how good coffee can really be. Hint: There's good coffee a'plenty right here in the Bay Area. Is anyone listening?