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.


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

get e-alerts in your inbox: