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.


prison phone calls (1) women's health (2) American Beverage Association (1) language (5) Jerry Sandusky (3) SB-5 (1) suicide barrier (2) Gardasil (1) white house (1) Richmond (4) vaccines (1) sexism (1) SB 402 (1) messaging (1) online marketing (1) El Monte (2) food justice (1) water (1) Proposition 29 (1) naacp (1) SSBs (1) Joe Paterno (1) Big Tobacco (3) Community Coalition Against Beverage Taxes (1) marketing (1) george lakoff (1) health equity (9) social change (1) chronic disease (2) weight of the nation (1) Catholic church (1) inequities (1) food environment (1) world water day (1) diabetes (1) Bloomberg (3) tobacco industry (2) digital marketing (2) Twitter for advocacy (1) values (1) government intrusion (1) Amanda Fallin (1) target marketing (5) Johnson & Johnson (1) stigma (1) media bites (1) soda industry (3) built environment (2) cigarette advertising (1) sandusky (2) choice (1) Colorado (1) news strategy (1) Dora the Explorer (1) structural racism (1) food and beverage marketing (3) genital warts (1) junk food (1) abortion (1) suicide nets (1) community health (1) collaboration (1) sanitation (1) Big Food (2) Wendy Davis (1) front groups (1) environmental health (1) Penn State (3) San Francisco (1) social justice (1) social media (1) Newtown (1) food industry (2) auto safety (1) alcohol (4) measure N (2) snap (1) food access (1) beverage industry (1) california (1) cancer prevention (1) suicide prevention (2) seat belt laws (1) product safety (1) childhood lead poisoning (1) gatorade bolt game (1) healthy eating (1) Aurora (1) junk food marketing (3) media advocacy (9) Whiteclay (4) reproductive justice (1) McDonald's (1) cervical cancer (1) equity (3) food deserts (1) physical activity (1) personal responsibility (2) prison system (1) tobacco (4) cosmetics (1) tobacco control (2) gun control (2) sexual health (1) obesity (9) autism (1) Sandy Hook (2) regulation (2) violence prevention (6) liana winett (1) Campaign for Safe Cosmetics (1) food (1) Nickelodeon (1) Pine Ridge reservation (1) Measure O (1) Happy Meals (1) soda (11) FCC (1) gun violence (1) gender (1) new year's resolutions (1) nanny state (2) campaign finance (1) Let's Move (1) framing (7) cancer research (1) paula deen (1) elephant triggers (1) mental health (2) HPV vaccine (1) beauty products (1) PepsiCo (1) Sam Kass (1) health care (1) junk food marketing to kids (1) breastfeeding (3) Michelle Obama (1) Pine Ridge Indian Reservation (2) Rachel Grana (1) soda tax (7) Golden Gate Bridge (2) prevention (1) Coca-Cola (3) Citizens United (1) Texas (1) Big Soda (1) tobacco tax (1) cap the tap (1) Oglala Sioux (3) sports drinks (1) water security (1) indoor smoking ban (1) public health (47) media (3) food marketing (3) institutional accountability (1) filibuster (1) apha (1) obesity prevention (1) industry appeals to choice (1) child sexual abuse (5) childhood obesity (1) media analysis (1) Food Marketing Workgroup (1) Oakland Unified School District (1) Marion Nestle (1) privilege (1) Merck (1) children's health (3) sugar-sweetened beverages (1) Connecticut shooting (1) Chile (1) advocacy (3) Tea Party (1) sugary drinks (3) food swamps (1) communication (1) corporate social responsibility (1)
  • Follow Us On Facebook
  • Follow Us On Twitter
  • Join Us On Youtube
  • BMSG RSS Feed

get e-alerts in your inbox: