McDonald's says no to kids' health

printer friendlyprinter friendly

Last year, San Francisco passed a groundbreaking ordinance to require restaurants offering free toys in kids' meals to make sure that those meals met certain minimum -- and very reasonable -- nutrition requirements. Now, McDonald's has decided to sidestep the law and charge a dime for each of its Happy Meal toys so that it doesn't have to make the meals any healthier (read: less bad) for kids. The kicker: They're painting this as an act of charity and donating those dimes to the local Ronald McDonald House.

Lawyer and writer Michele Simon has taken the food giant to task for this stunt and questioned whether the 10-cent toy gimmick really is in full compliance with the law. And good for her for doing so. After all, this law was designed specifically to "disassociate toys from unhealthy food," as Simon put it.

But what if McDonald's is in full compliance? Then what? Are they in the clear? Do they get to go on with business as usual?

Hardly. Pressure is on from parents and advocates everywhere. They are holding McDonald's and other food and beverage companies responsible for the health harms that their products cause. Why? Because we have a health crisis in this country and food companies are unwilling to reign in their junk food marketing to help abate it. So, whether McDonald's actions are legal are not, the real issue here -- children's health -- should not get lost in the conversation.

Even as childhood obesity rates and related health problems continue to climb, McDonald's and other companies seem as insistent as ever on circumventing parents and marketing high-calorie, low-nutrition food and drinks to young kids. Research from Yale's Rudd Center on Food Policy and Obesity has showed that McDonald's is using online marketing to attract children and teens. And numerous case studies -- compiled by BMSG in partnership with the Center for Digital Democracy and National Policy & Legal Analysis Network to Prevent Childhood Obesity -- show that McDonald's is among many companies that use aggressive digital marketing to target youth and get them to engage and bond with brands.

What does all of this mean? First, it reaffirms what so many already know: that advocates, parents, policymakers and health professionals of all stripes have their work cut out for them. Big Food's gloves are off, and it will take continued action on the part of all of these groups to chip away at the power that allows them to continually flout health.

Second, it means that food and beverage companies have their work cut out for them too. Michele Simon is just one of many heavyweights in the public health arena who -- I think it's safe to say -- is not about to let Big Food off the hook. Every Happy Meal-type shenanigan just emboldens those who care about public health even more. And the general public is growing impatient with seeing such institutions flex disproportionate amounts of power in ways that hurt society collectively. The resilience and tenacity of the Occupy movement speak to this. When people band together in the name of a shared goal and decide they've had enough of something, history shows the underdog can absolutely prevail. Public health and community groups have proven this with tobacco, with childhood lead poisoning, with seat belt laws, etc. -- and we're adding the food environment to that list.

paula deen (1) news monitoring (1) Oakland Unified School District (1) cancer research (1) apha (2) soda tax (11) beverage industry (2) adverse childhood experiences (3) messaging (3) built environment (2) Dora the Explorer (1) junk food marketing to kids (2) public health (67) digital marketing (2) abortion (1) childhood trauma (3) news coverage (1) diabetes (1) naacp (1) food marketing (3) Johnson & Johnson (1) media advocacy (21) Community Coalition Against Beverage Taxes (1) sexism (2) cosmetics (1) sandusky (2) junk food (2) privilege (1) cigarette advertising (1) health equity (10) children's health (3) journalism (1) gender (1) language (6) Twitter for advocacy (1) california (1) environmental health (1) Pine Ridge Indian Reservation (2) prevention (1) genital warts (1) suicide prevention (2) breastfeeding (3) SB 402 (1) Twitter (1) sexual health (1) public health data (1) framing (14) autism (1) Let's Move (1) target marketing (7) American Beverage Association (1) alcohol (5) SB 1000 (1) diabetes prevention (1) Donald Trump (2) food (1) obesity (10) suicide barrier (2) weight of the nation (1) democracy (1) racism (1) tobacco control (2) tobacco industry (2) news strategy (1) sexual violence (2) product safety (1) personal responsibility (3) water security (1) personal responsibility rhetoric (1) child sexual abuse (5) paper tigers (1) regulation (2) violence prevention (8) measure N (2) safety (1) gatorade bolt game (1) PepsiCo (1) cap the tap (1) junk food marketing (3) Food Marketing Workgroup (1) food deserts (1) equity (3) news analysis (3) gun violence (1) Nickelodeon (1) cancer prevention (1) health care (1) Whiteclay (4) food swamps (1) prison system (1) election 2016 (1) Wendy Davis (1) media (7) Black Lives Matter (1) Pine Ridge reservation (1) ACEs (2) white house (1) Bloomberg (3) childhood adversity (1) prison phone calls (1) sugary drinks (10) food access (1) emergency contraception (1) gun control (2) childhood obesity (1) violence (2) political correctness (1) community organizing (1) Joe Paterno (1) Colorado (1) soda warning labels (1) soda taxes (2) community violence (1) Bill Cosby (1) cervical cancer (1) McDonald's (1) community (1) food justice (1) default frame (1) structural racism (1) elephant triggers (1) physical activity (1) community safety (1) Big Soda (2) childhood lead poisoning (1) corporate social responsibility (1) front groups (1) social justice (1) snap (1) campaign finance (1) Chile (1) media bites (1) Amanda Fallin (1) youth (1) reproductive justice (1) Campaign for Safe Cosmetics (1) SB-5 (1) obesity prevention (1) george lakoff (1) Tea Party (1) public health policy (2) communication (2) authentic voices (1) social change (1) Rachel Grana (1) HPV vaccine (1) sports drinks (1) Jerry Sandusky (3) mental health (2) auto safety (1) marketing (1) beauty products (1) Texas (1) sanitation (1) news (2) Sam Kass (1) government intrusion (1) stigma (1) Michelle Obama (1) institutional accountability (1) Happy Meals (1) social media (2) online marketing (1) Golden Gate Bridge (2) suicide nets (1) Penn State (3) sugar-sweetened beverages (2) inequities (1) ssb (1) nanny state (2) Sandy Hook (2) collaboration (1) indoor smoking ban (1) Aurora (1) Newtown (1) SSBs (1) Catholic church (1) seat belt laws (1) industry appeals to choice (1) Citizens United (1) food and beverage marketing (3) soda (12) race (1) filibuster (1) Telluride (1) Richmond (5) childhood obestiy conference (1) choice (1) chronic disease (2) Gardasil (1) new year's resolutions (1) education (1) healthy eating (1) San Francisco (3) Oglala Sioux (3) Measure O (1) vaccines (1) women's health (2) community health (1) Big Food (2) food environment (1) Berkeley (2) liana winett (1) Proposition 29 (1) soda industry (4) Proposition 47 (1) Coca-Cola (3) El Monte (3) food industry (4) Connecticut shooting (1) Merck (1) Big Tobacco (3) advocacy (3) world water day (1) FCC (1) social math (1) summer camps (1) tobacco tax (1) water (1) values (1) tobacco (5) Marion Nestle (1) media analysis (5) sexual assault (1)
  • Follow Us On Facebook
  • Follow Us On Twitter
  • Join Us On Youtube
  • BMSG RSS Feed

get e-alerts in your inbox: