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.

privilege (1) environmental health (1) Catholic church (1) children's health (3) Sam Kass (1) cigarette advertising (1) Whiteclay (4) Coca-Cola (3) alcohol (4) suicide nets (1) health care (1) obesity (9) california (1) front groups (1) soda warning labels (1) Let's Move (1) liana winett (1) Golden Gate Bridge (2) indoor smoking ban (1) San Francisco (2) soda tax (9) built environment (2) filibuster (1) tobacco (4) Bloomberg (3) digital marketing (2) summer camps (1) Texas (1) cancer research (1) soda industry (4) Nickelodeon (1) social justice (1) community health (1) food (1) government intrusion (1) Pine Ridge reservation (1) sandusky (2) stigma (1) Big Soda (1) tobacco tax (1) social change (1) institutional accountability (1) Big Tobacco (3) autism (1) Proposition 29 (1) McDonald's (1) Jerry Sandusky (3) Rachel Grana (1) language (5) gender (1) personal responsibility (2) Oakland Unified School District (1) communication (2) auto safety (1) social media (1) PepsiCo (1) SSBs (1) food deserts (1) snap (1) food and beverage marketing (3) Measure O (1) ssb (1) Food Marketing Workgroup (1) Community Coalition Against Beverage Taxes (1) sanitation (1) Berkeley (1) world water day (1) Campaign for Safe Cosmetics (1) george lakoff (1) media analysis (1) sexual health (1) cancer prevention (1) media bites (1) inequities (1) reproductive justice (1) product safety (1) sugar-sweetened beverages (1) Sandy Hook (2) food swamps (1) advocacy (3) prison phone calls (1) food access (1) Amanda Fallin (1) online marketing (1) public health policy (1) food industry (2) physical activity (1) Michelle Obama (1) junk food marketing to kids (1) Merck (1) marketing (1) Happy Meals (1) food marketing (3) American Beverage Association (1) Richmond (4) SB-5 (1) El Monte (2) beauty products (1) mental health (2) values (1) vaccines (1) genital warts (1) Connecticut shooting (1) Penn State (3) collaboration (1) measure N (2) equity (3) paula deen (1) Marion Nestle (1) structural racism (1) tobacco industry (2) Big Food (2) suicide barrier (2) diabetes (1) cap the tap (1) water (1) naacp (1) Newtown (1) prison system (1) soda (12) FCC (1) beverage industry (1) cervical cancer (1) healthy eating (1) childhood obesity (1) white house (1) seat belt laws (1) regulation (2) media advocacy (12) weight of the nation (1) Citizens United (1) messaging (2) corporate social responsibility (1) abortion (1) SB 1000 (1) gatorade bolt game (1) framing (7) Johnson & Johnson (1) public health (51) Colorado (1) media (3) Aurora (1) chronic disease (2) food justice (1) news strategy (1) sugary drinks (6) target marketing (5) suicide prevention (2) health equity (9) obesity prevention (1) Joe Paterno (1) gun violence (1) choice (1) food environment (1) women's health (2) Chile (1) Wendy Davis (1) elephant triggers (1) Twitter for advocacy (1) sexism (1) nanny state (2) Gardasil (1) sports drinks (1) childhood lead poisoning (1) SB 402 (1) HPV vaccine (1) Oglala Sioux (3) junk food (1) campaign finance (1) junk food marketing (3) Tea Party (1) violence prevention (6) Pine Ridge Indian Reservation (2) cosmetics (1) Dora the Explorer (1) tobacco control (2) prevention (1) gun control (2) breastfeeding (3) water security (1) new year's resolutions (1) child sexual abuse (5) industry appeals to choice (1) apha (1)
  • Follow Us On Facebook
  • Follow Us On Twitter
  • Join Us On Youtube
  • BMSG RSS Feed

get e-alerts in your inbox: