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.

cap the tap (1) cosmetics (1) Rachel Grana (1) campaign finance (1) media bites (1) Bill Cosby (1) health equity (10) Amanda Fallin (1) SB 402 (1) inequities (1) social math (1) journalism (1) authentic voices (1) sexual health (1) digital marketing (2) Let's Move (1) food (1) cigarette advertising (1) Twitter for advocacy (1) Johnson & Johnson (1) Telluride (1) suicide prevention (2) Twitter (1) Sam Kass (1) Pine Ridge Indian Reservation (2) McDonald's (1) collaboration (1) news strategy (1) physical activity (1) cervical cancer (1) front groups (1) community safety (1) food marketing (4) soda industry (4) regulation (2) community health (1) Gardasil (1) racism (1) Donald Trump (2) diabetes (1) environmental health (1) weight of the nation (1) Measure O (1) indoor smoking ban (1) adverse childhood experiences (3) Oglala Sioux (3) Berkeley (2) race (1) childhood obesity (1) suicide barrier (2) structural racism (1) tobacco (5) social media (2) Black Lives Matter (1) Connecticut shooting (1) public health data (1) abortion (1) Citizens United (1) beverage industry (2) San Francisco (3) community violence (1) Catholic church (1) SSBs (1) food access (1) vaccines (1) ssb (1) reproductive justice (1) health care (1) junk food marketing (4) Sandy Hook (2) Wendy Davis (1) SB-5 (1) obesity prevention (1) sexism (2) HPV vaccine (1) auto safety (1) privilege (1) child sexual abuse (5) liana winett (1) youth (1) Jerry Sandusky (3) Chile (1) Dora the Explorer (1) childhood adversity (1) mental health (2) violence (2) government intrusion (1) nonprofit communications (1) tobacco industry (2) emergency contraception (1) sanitation (1) sandusky (2) online marketing (1) Nickelodeon (1) soda tax (11) Big Soda (2) communication strategy (1) prison phone calls (1) stigma (1) Golden Gate Bridge (2) world water day (1) Joe Paterno (1) children's health (3) food swamps (1) industry appeals to choice (1) Food Marketing Workgroup (1) Newtown (1) personal responsibility (3) product safety (1) chronic disease (2) Tea Party (1) tobacco tax (1) obesity (10) prison system (1) paula deen (1) Proposition 47 (1) elephant triggers (1) cannes lions festival (1) filibuster (1) snap (1) sports drinks (1) white house (1) Aurora (1) soda (12) El Monte (3) news coverage (1) food environment (1) target marketing (8) gatorade bolt game (1) Big Food (2) public health policy (2) childhood lead poisoning (1) gun control (2) SB 1000 (1) cancer prevention (1) genital warts (1) diabetes prevention (1) food and beverage marketing (3) george lakoff (1) language (6) gun violence (1) sugary drinks (10) values (1) advocacy (3) prevention (1) Merck (1) food deserts (1) messaging (3) Pine Ridge reservation (1) Penn State (3) marketing (1) sexual violence (2) childhood trauma (3) Proposition 29 (1) sexual assault (1) soda warning labels (1) california (1) sugar-sweetened beverages (2) autism (1) news analysis (3) Bloomberg (3) beauty products (1) apha (2) Oakland Unified School District (1) FCC (1) media advocacy (22) Michelle Obama (1) default frame (1) naacp (1) Richmond (5) new year's resolutions (1) Colorado (1) tobacco control (2) nanny state (2) Marion Nestle (1) gender (1) social change (1) choice (1) corporate social responsibility (1) public health (68) food industry (4) childhood obestiy conference (1) Whiteclay (4) political correctness (1) democracy (1) paper tigers (1) media analysis (5) seat belt laws (1) built environment (2) institutional accountability (1) equity (3) community organizing (1) junk food (2) water security (1) Coca-Cola (3) violence prevention (8) suicide nets (1) alcohol (5) women's health (2) Texas (1) Campaign for Safe Cosmetics (1) cancer research (1) breastfeeding (3) American Beverage Association (1) PepsiCo (1) framing (14) soda taxes (2) healthy eating (1) media (7) junk food marketing to kids (2) safety (1) Community Coalition Against Beverage Taxes (1) education (1) measure N (2) communication (2) election 2016 (1) social justice (1) Big Tobacco (3) community (1) food justice (1) personal responsibility rhetoric (1) Happy Meals (1) news monitoring (1) summer camps (1) ACEs (2) water (1) news (2)
  • Follow Us On Facebook
  • Follow Us On Twitter
  • Join Us On Youtube
  • BMSG RSS Feed

get e-alerts in your inbox: