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.


breastfeeding (3) junk food (2) media bites (1) Jerry Sandusky (3) emergency contraception (1) front groups (1) Golden Gate Bridge (2) Texas (1) sugar-sweetened beverages (2) Aurora (1) Donald Trump (2) world water day (1) public health policy (2) Sam Kass (1) values (1) soda (12) Pine Ridge Indian Reservation (2) Big Food (2) paula deen (1) campaign finance (1) default frame (1) food swamps (1) Big Soda (2) sexism (2) soda tax (11) nanny state (2) target marketing (7) PepsiCo (1) community health (1) Whiteclay (4) media analysis (5) news (2) public health (66) SSBs (1) suicide prevention (2) social justice (1) Pine Ridge reservation (1) Let's Move (1) Connecticut shooting (1) product safety (1) Tea Party (1) weight of the nation (1) Colorado (1) obesity (10) seat belt laws (1) suicide barrier (2) democracy (1) soda warning labels (1) inequities (1) sexual violence (2) Gardasil (1) community violence (1) equity (3) gun control (2) new year's resolutions (1) Community Coalition Against Beverage Taxes (1) American Beverage Association (1) childhood obesity (1) advocacy (3) language (6) soda industry (4) tobacco tax (1) food environment (1) chronic disease (2) news strategy (1) reproductive justice (1) built environment (2) cervical cancer (1) education (1) Merck (1) Sandy Hook (2) personal responsibility (3) food marketing (3) diabetes prevention (1) liana winett (1) sports drinks (1) Newtown (1) Twitter (1) filibuster (1) regulation (2) marketing (1) prison phone calls (1) Proposition 29 (1) youth (1) sanitation (1) messaging (3) sexual assault (1) structural racism (1) Berkeley (2) journalism (1) tobacco industry (2) Oakland Unified School District (1) cigarette advertising (1) food justice (1) suicide nets (1) autism (1) political correctness (1) soda taxes (2) food access (1) industry appeals to choice (1) violence prevention (8) gun violence (1) prevention (1) summer camps (1) ACEs (2) Nickelodeon (1) tobacco (5) collaboration (1) food industry (4) Big Tobacco (3) childhood lead poisoning (1) Bloomberg (3) SB 402 (1) Chile (1) snap (1) Johnson & Johnson (1) adverse childhood experiences (3) childhood obestiy conference (1) sugary drinks (10) obesity prevention (1) El Monte (3) Proposition 47 (1) SB-5 (1) Oglala Sioux (3) elephant triggers (1) auto safety (1) SB 1000 (1) stigma (1) sandusky (2) women's health (2) paper tigers (1) Amanda Fallin (1) Campaign for Safe Cosmetics (1) food deserts (1) child sexual abuse (5) cancer research (1) food (1) Michelle Obama (1) FCC (1) health care (1) tobacco control (2) election 2016 (1) white house (1) Penn State (3) choice (1) institutional accountability (1) abortion (1) sexual health (1) gatorade bolt game (1) Food Marketing Workgroup (1) personal responsibility rhetoric (1) corporate social responsibility (1) junk food marketing to kids (2) community organizing (1) cosmetics (1) violence (1) Richmond (5) Catholic church (1) Measure O (1) gender (1) media advocacy (21) media (7) beauty products (1) genital warts (1) Rachel Grana (1) healthy eating (1) indoor smoking ban (1) environmental health (1) government intrusion (1) online marketing (1) cancer prevention (1) prison system (1) public health data (1) california (1) Joe Paterno (1) Marion Nestle (1) diabetes (1) McDonald's (1) physical activity (1) Dora the Explorer (1) social change (1) water security (1) childhood adversity (1) Citizens United (1) Wendy Davis (1) Twitter for advocacy (1) Happy Meals (1) news analysis (2) measure N (2) apha (2) communication (2) news coverage (1) alcohol (5) mental health (2) Coca-Cola (3) food and beverage marketing (3) community safety (1) george lakoff (1) Telluride (1) HPV vaccine (1) social math (1) digital marketing (2) children's health (3) social media (2) San Francisco (3) racism (1) water (1) news monitoring (1) junk food marketing (3) race (1) privilege (1) Bill Cosby (1) framing (14) cap the tap (1) naacp (1) health equity (10) ssb (1) beverage industry (2) vaccines (1) authentic voices (1) childhood trauma (3)
  • Follow Us On Facebook
  • Follow Us On Twitter
  • Join Us On Youtube
  • BMSG RSS Feed

get e-alerts in your inbox: