When the Messenger Undermines the Message
Last week, McDonald’s CEO Chris Kempczinski posted a video tasting the company’s new Big Arch burger. It went viral. Just not the way McDonald’s intended.
One bite — barely. He called a hamburger “the product.” His body language communicated discomfort rather than enthusiasm. The internet responded swiftly: “His aura screams kale salad” collected tens of thousands of shares within hours.
On the surface, this is a straightforward story about authenticity failing in real time. But there’s a second layer that makes this a more interesting case study.
The Obvious Lesson: Authenticity Is Non-Negotiable
When a leader’s non-verbal communication contradicts the words coming out of their mouth, audiences don’t split the difference. They believe the body language. Every time.
This is a structural problem, not a personal one. Kempczinski is likely an excellent executive. But being the CEO of McDonald’s does not automatically make someone the right face for McDonald’s food. Authentic enthusiasm cannot be performed — and when it’s absent, the message collapses regardless of how polished the production is.
The selection of a spokesperson is a strategic communication decision, not just a logistical one. Organizations should ask: does this person genuinely embody what we’re trying to communicate? If the answer is uncertain, that’s a signal worth heeding before the camera rolls.
The Twist: Was This Accidental Genius?
Here’s where the analysis gets more interesting.
Because the video was so visibly awkward, content creators couldn’t look away. They bought Big Arches. They filmed reaction videos. They posted comparisons. They drove massive awareness for a brand new menu item — at virtually no cost to McDonald’s.
A polished, convincing taste test would have been seen by Kempczinski’s Instagram followers and promptly forgotten. Instead, the Big Arch became temporarily inescapable.
So the question worth sitting with: was this a communications failure — or a sophisticated play for earned media? If it was deliberate, it deserves genuine respect.
What Leaders Should Take Away
Whether the awkward taste test was intentional or not, the communication principles it illustrates remain clear.
First, the CEO is not always the right messenger. Authenticity matters more than access. The most senior person in the room is not automatically the most credible voice for every message.
Second, as AI-generated content becomes increasingly convincing, genuine human credibility becomes more valuable — not less. Audiences have always been able to sense what is real. That instinct is not going away.
The Big Arch video is a reminder that when decisions become symbols, the audience decides what those symbols mean. The only question is whether leaders are making those decisions deliberately.
When was the last time you evaluated whether your messenger actually matched your message — before the camera was on?
