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.

social justice (2) stigma (1) Aurora (1) Nickelodeon (1) measure N (2) child sexual abuse (5) Telluride (1) Coca-Cola (3) Jerry Sandusky (3) campaign finance (1) Proposition 29 (1) racism (1) Bill Cosby (1) childhood obestiy conference (1) American Beverage Association (1) childhood obesity (1) SB 1000 (1) youth (1) Big Tobacco (3) breastfeeding (3) personal responsibility rhetoric (1) inequities (1) Pine Ridge Indian Reservation (2) regulation (2) community organizing (1) Tea Party (1) new year's resolutions (1) Sam Kass (1) liana winett (1) choice (1) values (1) obesity prevention (1) cancer research (1) california (1) social math (1) built environment (2) Oglala Sioux (3) soda industry (4) paula deen (1) sexual violence (2) digital marketing (2) Let's Move (1) cancer prevention (1) tobacco control (2) structural racism (1) physical activity (1) public health (70) Gardasil (1) advocacy (3) Richmond (5) Food Marketing Workgroup (1) education (1) Community Coalition Against Beverage Taxes (1) suicide nets (1) naacp (1) default frame (1) institutional accountability (1) genital warts (1) nonprofit communications (1) children's health (3) ACEs (2) collaboration (1) apha (3) Dora the Explorer (1) environmental health (1) Big Soda (2) sugar-sweetened beverages (2) media advocacy (23) cannes lions festival (1) election 2016 (1) food (1) media bites (1) health care (1) food access (1) tobacco industry (2) sandusky (2) sexual assault (1) auto safety (1) corporate social responsibility (1) food marketing (4) Amanda Fallin (1) gatorade bolt game (1) george lakoff (1) news (2) product safety (1) obesity (10) community safety (1) SB 402 (1) Wendy Davis (1) social media (2) soda taxes (2) weight of the nation (1) gender (1) food justice (1) messaging (3) Measure O (1) San Francisco (3) ssb (1) Marion Nestle (1) language (6) cosmetics (1) community (1) media analysis (6) vaccines (1) food environment (1) community health (1) Colorado (1) beverage industry (2) Connecticut shooting (1) tobacco (5) childhood trauma (3) public health policy (2) cigarette advertising (1) government intrusion (1) suicide barrier (2) Penn State (3) summer camps (1) Berkeley (2) target marketing (8) race (1) privilege (1) suicide prevention (2) world water day (1) marketing (1) news monitoring (1) SB-5 (1) industry appeals to choice (1) political correctness (1) water (1) Happy Meals (1) Texas (1) media (7) Citizens United (1) reproductive justice (1) soda warning labels (1) Oakland Unified School District (1) FCC (1) McDonald's (1) health equity (10) soda (12) childhood lead poisoning (1) Black Lives Matter (1) seat belt laws (1) communication strategy (1) news coverage (1) HPV vaccine (1) soda tax (11) online marketing (1) indoor smoking ban (1) childhood adversity (1) women's health (2) Sandy Hook (2) sanitation (1) Campaign for Safe Cosmetics (1) gun violence (1) Catholic church (1) gun control (2) white house (1) Twitter for advocacy (1) emergency contraception (1) abortion (1) PepsiCo (1) news analysis (3) Joe Paterno (1) nanny state (2) paper tigers (1) Golden Gate Bridge (2) cap the tap (1) equity (3) sexism (2) elephant triggers (1) autism (1) food swamps (1) communication (2) Johnson & Johnson (1) food and beverage marketing (3) adverse childhood experiences (3) Chile (1) snap (1) alcohol (5) SSBs (1) prison phone calls (1) strategic communication (1) chronic disease (2) water security (1) beauty products (1) democracy (1) Proposition 47 (1) diabetes (1) food industry (4) Pine Ridge reservation (1) sexual health (1) food deserts (1) Rachel Grana (1) tobacco tax (1) Twitter (1) junk food marketing (4) Michelle Obama (1) healthy eating (1) Whiteclay (4) Big Food (2) sugary drinks (10) junk food marketing to kids (2) framing (14) Bloomberg (3) mental health (2) cervical cancer (1) Donald Trump (2) prevention (1) social change (1) filibuster (1) Newtown (1) public health data (1) diabetes prevention (1) personal responsibility (3) front groups (1) violence prevention (8) violence (2) junk food (2) journalism (1) safety (1) Merck (1) sports drinks (1) prison system (1) El Monte (3) authentic voices (1) community violence (1) news strategy (1)
  • Follow Us On Facebook
  • Follow Us On Twitter
  • Join Us On Youtube
  • BMSG RSS Feed

get e-alerts in your inbox: