What is PepsiCo buying with donations to communities of color?

printer friendlyprinter friendly

When I heard recently that the National Association of Hispanic Journalists had accepted $100,000 from PepsiCo, with half of the money going toward scholarships and internships for journalism students, I was taken back to 1988 to a smoke-filled hotel conference room in Washington D.C.

I had just been elected to NAHJ's board of directors, and we were debating whether or not to accept a sizeable contribution from tobacco giant Philip Morris.

"I don't have any problems with Philip Morris," I remember a fellow board member saying after she took a deep drag from her cigarette, clearly ignoring the irony.

I said something about it not being a good idea while puffing on a Benson & Hedges Deluxe Ultra Light Menthol 100. Several of us were smoking while we discussed the subject.

Like tobacco use, rising consumption of sugary drinks has become a major public health concern. Studies show that soda, sports drinks and other high-calorie beverages are major contributors to obesity and related illnesses including diabetes and heart disease (research shows diet drinks aren't all that good for you either).

And like the tobacco industry, soft drink companies target young people and communities of color -- groups that suffer the highest rates of obesity-related diseases.

I don't know whether anyone on the NAHJ board or staff pointed out the parallels between the generous Philip Morris and PepsiCo gifts. Or whether there was even any debate about accepting the money. These are tough times, especially for the journalism industry.

Yet, just like taking money from tobacco, accepting funding from the soda industry can put organizations like NAHJ on a slippery slope, with the potential to risk their values, integrity and public trust.

There are other parallels between tobacco and soda, as highlighted in a June 19 report by Berkeley Media Studies Group and the Public Health Advocacy Institute, "Soda and Tobacco Industry Corporate Social Responsibility Campaigns: How Do They Compare?"

"Because sugary beverages are implicated in the national as well as global obesity crisis, soda manufacturers have recently employed elaborate, expensive, multinational corporate social responsibility campaigns [that] echo the tobacco industry's use of such campaigns as way to focus responsibility on consumers rather than on the corporations," the study noted.

These campaigns also seek to bolster the popularity of soda companies and their products and prevent regulation (meanwhile employing tobacco industry tactics in aggressively fighting policy proposals such as soda taxes and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's controversial measure to limit sugary drink portion sizes).

In a press release, PepsiCo announced that the NAHJ contribution was part of La Promesa [The Promise] of PepsiCo, a corporate social responsibility campaign "that focuses specifically on Latino empowerment and the issues that matter most to Hispanics including Latino education, employment opportunities, promoting active lifestyles, and investing in science to develop healthier products."

As part of its "Promesa," PepsiCo also made significant contributions to other national Latino organizations including the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute and historic civil rights groups League of United Latin American Citizens and National Council of La Raza.

One only has to watch the latest TV commercial by the American Beverage Association, which represents PepsiCo and Coca-Cola, to see that they are doing everything they can to convince the public -- and their shareholders -- of their corporate social responsibility.

Titled "We're Delivering," the ad touts the beverage industry's role in addressing the nation's obesity crisis (without really saying so): "For our families, our neighbors and our communities, America's beverage companies have created a wide range of new choices, developing smaller portion sizes, and more low and no-calorie beverages. Adding clearer calorie labels so you know exactly what you're choosing. And in schools, replacing full-calorie soft drinks with lower calorie options."

The problem is that despite the fact that beverage companies in the U.S. spent nearly a half billion dollars in 2006 to market directly to children ages 2-17, and each year, youth are exposed to hundreds of TV and digital ads, the beverage industry aggressively rejects claims that its products and marketing practices play any role in the obesity epidemic.

The beverage industry says it's about consumers making poor choices and not increasing their level of physical activity yet ignores the context in which those decisions are made. It is disingenuous and deceptive to deny the contribution sugary drinks make to the obesity epidemic. It fails to recognize the collaboration it will take between industry, government and consumers to solve the obesity crisis.

Meanwhile, the question remains: Should influential organizations representing the media, elected officials and civil rights advocates receive financial support from soda if it means not holding the industry accountable for its part in the obesity problem as well as the solution?

I know that if I were back on the board of NAHJ, an organization I am proudly a lifetime member of, I would at least put it up for discussion -- admittedly between sips of Diet Coke.

This blog has also appeared in Richmond Pulse, AlterNet, New America Media, Reporting on Health, People of Color Organize, and Highbrow Magazine.

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

get e-alerts in your inbox: