The examples used in the weekly report are needlessly not inclusive. The prominent usage of mcdonalds as an example is off putting not only to people that are against animal abuse (e.g. vegans) but also people that don’t like to junk food (e.g. people that care about their health).
Surely you can come up with some better examples that won’t put off a large number of people for no good reason?
Hey Jan 
Welcome to the Emma Community 
Thank you for this feedback. We’d be happy to review the comparisons in the weekly report.
We’d love to hear any examples you have!
“You spent X last week on Y, that is an equivalent to taking Z rides on the tube!”
“You spent X last week on Y, that is an equivalent to planting Z trees using https://moretrees.eco/” (I assume you’re happy promoting other companies if you’re promoting mcdonalds now).
I’ll post more if I think of any
Love the tree idea! 
And yes, please share any more ideas you have
Not all of us can relate to your suggestions either though. I’ve never ridden the tube or planted trees using the site you mentioned and therefore these comparisons mean absolutely nothing to me.
The comparisons should be relatable to a broad range of users and not just a niche group.
They were just examples.
The point is the examples shouldn’t be something that promotes industries that destroy our environment and are exploit and abuse billions of animals every year.
I feel like the weekly report could improve in general - “You haven’t spent at PLACE X in a week, well done” - well I’ve only been to PLACE X twice in the past year for example. So why highlight it? There must be more useful things to highlight.