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.


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

get e-alerts in your inbox: