I've recently been annoyed by the commercials that Subway has been airing, comparing their food to the Big Mac at McDonalds.
They offend me because they are attacking the worst possible item (nutrition wise) on McDonald's menu, and saying that their food is better. Which is generally true, but if you don't compare items that are comparable, then you are just being obnoxious. It would be much more accurate to compare something like the Italian BMT, or Chicken Bacon Ranch sandwiches from Subway to the Big Mac. Those have 450 Calories, with 21 grams of fat, and 440 calories with 26 grams of fat, respectively. That's not so much better for you than the Big Mac is, which has 600 calories and 33 grams of fat. The big mac is still worse, but at least that is a reasonable comparison. And that assumes that you eat a 6" sub, not a foot long, which is what many people would have if they went to subway.
Who is the commercial aimed at? Anyone who is usually eating a Big Mac is not really very likely to be choosing one of the 7 subs with 6 grams of fat or less. Or if they do, it isn't because it is better for them.
I can't stand McDonald's food in general, it is high calorie, poor taste, expensive, and generally unhealthy, but I don't think it is appropriate to try to make your own menu look better by making misleading menu comparisons.