Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Government Abandons Children to Big Food

By Michele Simon, AlterNet. Posted July 22, 2005.


A government-convened panel that was intended to discuss ways to limit marketing junk food to kids instead became an enormous PR opportunity for the junk food industry.
Advertisement

With rising rates of childhood obesity and diabetes, you might think that when the federal government convenes a meeting on how food companies market food to kids, talk of how to regulate industry practices might actually be on the agenda.

But you'd be wrong. Last week, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) co-hosted a workshop in Washington entitled "Perspectives on Marketing, Self-Regulation, and Childhood Obesity." But what should have been a forum on how to set limits around the marketing of junk food to children turned into a PR opportunity for industry. Senator Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) got it right when he said in his opening remarks that "corporate America spends $12 billion a year on food ads to kids because it works."

The only reason that FTC and HHS bothered to hold the meeting at all was that the Institute of Medicine (IOM) recommended they do so in its report on childhood obesity last year. Specifically, the IOM called on the government to "convene a national conference to develop guidelines for the advertising and marketing of food and beverages directed at children." They also recommended that "the Federal Trade Commission have the authority and resources to monitor compliance with food and beverage advertising practices."

But none of this was even remotely discussed in Washington. And no wonder. By conservative estimates, a full two-thirds of the panelists -- hand-picked by the FTC and HHS -- had financial ties to either the food or advertising industries. To add insult to injury, from the chairman of the FTC on down, nearly every government official who had the chance made clear that regulation of junk food ads aimed at children was not on the table and wouldn't be anytime soon. FTC Commissioner Thomas Leary went so far as to warn against the government becoming a "nanny state." If this sounds familiar, it's because that's usually the industry's line.

And the industry should thank Uncle Sam for providing it with a very expensive press conference. Among the 350 attendees were reporters from all the major outlets. And sure enough, much of the media spin included the industry promises of doing right by America's kids, with only a modicum of criticism from public interest groups.

For example, Nickelodeon took the opportunity to announce that its popular children's character, SpongeBob, will soon be hawking spinach and carrots. Notably lacking was any promise of removing his image from such unhealthy products as Pop-Tarts, Kraft Cheez-Its and Breyer's cookie-dough ice cream.

Also, the Grocery Manufacturers of America (GMA) -- the major trade group for the food industry -- announced with much fanfare a set of recommendations to boost self-regulation, an obvious attempt at staving off any government intervention, as if they had anything to worry about. But what GMA conveniently neglected to mention was how they are on record as opposing just about every school nutrition bill across the country. So much for caring about children's health.


Digg!

Michele Simon, a public-health attorney who teaches health policy at UC Hastings College of the Law, is director of the Center for Informed Food Choices, a nonprofit in Oakland, Calif.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
what do you expect?
Posted by: mwildfire on Jul 22, 2005 4:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Clinton often appointed agency heads from the industries the agency should be regulating. Bush has done so in every case. Probably a lot of the most ethical people have quit by now, and those who won't, realize they'd better keep their mouths shut. Washington DC is one big whorehouse. We'd be better off shutting down agencies like USDA and EPA so we could at least save the tax dollars.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: what do you expect? Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: what do you expect? Posted by: Iana_g
» RE: what do you expect? Posted by: maxpayne
» RE: what do you expect? Posted by: Iana_g
» RE: what do you expect? Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: what do you expect? Posted by: Iana_g
» RE: what do you expect? Posted by: maxpayne
» RE: what do you expect? Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: what do you expect? Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: what do you expect? Posted by: Iana_g
» RE: what do you expect? Posted by: maxpayne
» RE: what do you expect? Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: what do you expect? Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: what do you expect? Posted by: Lincoln fan
» RE: what do you expect? Posted by: maxpayne
» RE: what do you expect? Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: what do you expect? Posted by: maxpayne
» RE: what do you expect? Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: what do you expect? Posted by: bornxeyed
Alternative Food Choices
Posted by: Sandra on Jul 22, 2005 8:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The organic and vegetarian food movements have done a lot to educate the public about good, healthy food choices. Media literacy information has shown that children are targeted as consumers from the time they're toddlers and seduced by fast food and junk food commercials on children's television programming. Our schools battle with companies offering sponsorships and vending machines as resources in times of tight budgets. The federal government needs to take an active role and provide financial resources to states to address physical activity, nutrition and obesity. Our short sighted and ignorant policies have greatly contributed to the illnesses and diseases associated with lack of exercise and poor nutrition. Alas, given the corporate ownership of this administration and Congress, we can't expect to see the feds take a leadership role. Much of the effort will have to come from parents and community groups determined to address the problems.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Alternative Food Choices Posted by: maxpayne
» RE: Alternative Food Choices Posted by: maxpayne
» RE: Alternative Food Choices Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: Alternative Food Choices Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: Alternative Food Choices Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: Alternative Food Choices Posted by: maxpayne
» RE: Alternative Food Choices Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: Alternative Food Choices Posted by: maxpayne
The Government, The Government!
Posted by: Iana_g on Jul 22, 2005 8:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Are we so weak and are such a danger to ourselves that we need the government to get involved in junk food??? That is the last thing we need.
How about we quit buying it? Or we tell our kids to not eat it. Then it wouldn't be an issue.
As long as a business participates in a legal venture, why send the govenment after it?
If we continue to stop free people from engaging in legal activity, we soon won't recognize our own country.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

'To do' list to solve the food issue:
Posted by: kevine8 on Jul 22, 2005 9:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1. Turn off the TV!
2. Encourage children to learn about where food really comes from (the soil, not plastic packages!)
3. Ban junk food from home (come on you can do it)
4. Hold Government accountable
5. Hold Big Business accountable
6. Hold oneself accountable
7. Go to a Farmer's Market!

:)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Free Trade in Action
Posted by: nakis on Jul 22, 2005 9:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is an excellent example of giving industry free reign. A country full of unhealthy obese children.

We know that corporations exist for nothing else but to grow. They have no loyalty except to their botton line.
For you "why do you hate America because you hate corporations" people, I don't hate corporation. I don't hate capitalism. If they are both engaged in responsibly and there are regulations controlling those industries.

As these corporations spend billions trying to work out every penny they can get they will take actions that are overall destructive to the people. You see this everyday. It's front page news daily on some pollution, some drug, rise in diabetes, scandals, etc.. . Yes people are responsible for taking care of themselves. But when everywhere you look the landscape is designed for selling. Every periodical, media is laden with sales pitches designed to maximize your desire for anything. They spend billions on figuring out how to make you want stuff you don't need or shouldn't eat.

Free trade is harmful. The industries cannot regulate themselves and keep the people healthy no more than a drug addict can.

And we have a bunch of pudgy 10 year olds to prove it. And what does the government do? Play toadie and sacrifices the health of our children.

And please do not forget the long term affect of this conditioning. They children subjected to this kind of bombarment grow into adults who follow the same path. They become mentally wired for it. Why is it that so many adults in America are equally obese?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Free Trade in Action Posted by: Iana_g
» RE: Free Trade in Action Posted by: maxpayne
» RE: Free Trade in Action Posted by: beata
another perspective
Posted by: bornxeyed on Jul 22, 2005 9:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Who pays for all the health problems of these obese, toxified, chemically-stunted children when they become adults? Why it's Medicare and Medicaid, i. e. the taxpayers, the "clean-up" arm of every industry in existence. And even if they have private health insurance their added costs increase premiums for everyone, especially the healthy, who pay in but don't take out as nearly as much.

If MY govenment is using MY money to fix the ill-effects of the corporate profit drive, I damn well want MY government doing its best to reduce those costs in the best way possible. Insuring unhealthily fed children don't turn into chronically ill adults sure seems like a good start. So is adequate environmental regulations, so that MY government doesn't have to clean up the mess with MY money.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: another perspective Posted by: monkeywrench
» RE: another perspective Posted by: bornxeyed
Why is it legal to have vending machines in schools??
Posted by: verdanteye@yahoo.com on Jul 22, 2005 10:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For the life of me, I can't see why vending machines are allowed in schools. Especially elementary schools! You can say whatever you like about parental guidance and educating kids and all that, but to expect (for example) a six year old to make what is basically an adult decision re: food choice is ludicrous.
Someone further in the comment chain made remarks to the effect that a "smarter" child will make the right choices, as though this were some kind of 'survival of the fittest' scenario. Baloney!!
1. biology: Sugar, salt and fat are pretty hard to resist, and children just don't have the control that adults do--it takes time to develop these things.
2. There are plenty of extremely intelligent people who are anywhere from slightly overweight to morbidly obese. Is there some new study out correlating body weight with intelligence that I'm not aware of????

I think good food choices are going to be a result of conditioning, not intelligence. And when I was growing up there were NO vending machines in the schools. Period!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Government Abandons Children
Posted by: Iana_g on Jul 22, 2005 11:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ah! If only the government would abandon children. When I was a kid, I didn't even have a social security number. Now every kid is entered into some database in government. I don't know of any parent who has theire kid in a data base, do you? Aren't you a little alarmed about that?
Regardless of our feelings on obesity, drug abuse, et al, we cannot seriously want the government to become involved in our food choices. They'll create a false front that looks like its a program to control obesity, but the real purpose.... who knows.
Please control your kid and quit inviting government into our lives. They are not welcome.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

1984
Posted by: Guy on Jul 22, 2005 12:06 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So much for a "free and open society." Sounds like "1984" to me.

Guy

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

mcarthy-esque alternet.
Posted by: spitviper on Jul 22, 2005 4:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
yeah this whole site does seem like 1984: content, staff, and slanted gripes and whine....

and everytime you criticize, you're either logged off or called a "republican." Alternet.org, while singing liberal songs, is enacting their own McCarthesque PATRIOT ACT.... they do what they want and if you don't like it and speak out, you are intimidated or silenced. I say this because a friend of mine,Sarah Daugherty felt that the editor has usurped images and intellectual property from those posting in "reader comment," so she spoke up about this, and was treated as dismissivelyas achild and then Alternet logged her off... blocked the dissenting (and liberal) voice for good. My friend Michael, who stood up for her, was logged off and blocked as well. Neither of these people are criminals nor are they "dangerous" beyond their pechent for speaking their minds. the write and apply their knowledge and education, helping others along the way. Neither, incidentally is insane nor a drug user, which is more than i could say about some of the people who post all over this place.

Ms. Daugherty is a friend of mine, by the way... She has an advanced degree in writing from an Industry Based school in the Los Angeles area that emphasizes professionalism in their writers, including how to recognize intellectual property. In addition, she's an English teacher, tlaented writer, as well as local artist and activist. Any statements otherwise are defammatory. Yet, she was treated like less than a citizen... she's the greatest thing i've ever met... sane and clean and laughing her ass with me at these psuedo "hunter s. thompson" style Alternet writers that hack their extreme (and now hypocritical) slant ... Yet she was silenced for mentioning a possible prob.

Nevermind the kids cafeteria... kids eat what they want to eat and they falsely learn from their homes that there is a difference between delicious and healthful. That's the parents problem. What i want ot say is that this PLACE, Alternet, IS LIKE 1984... and hypocritical as hell. Notice, now, how most of the stories posted since are only from Alternet staff? problem?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

et al.
Posted by: spitviper on Jul 22, 2005 4:48 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now we're laughing at the "Support Alternet" box... soliciting donations. Quite a nice country we've got here if you can bitch about anything in gov't and then list yourselves as a 'no profit' organization to solicit monies... hey... do you think they apply for gov't grants and then preach about the gov't wasting tax payers money? I'm no govn't supporter, but maybe alternet is if the moneys right.... At the rate that they act here on Alternet.org, censoring, blocking, demonizing anyone critical to them, you'd think they WERE the gov't or holding hands with them... maybe so... hey everyone here is so paranoid... maybe alternet is emassing info (soliciting posts and rthe FEDS so they can get grant monies.... You guys on alternet.org like that kind of conspiracy theory stuff... why not look at this possibility.... (just kiddin. sort of.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: et al. Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: et al. Posted by: spitviper
» RE: et al. Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: et al. Posted by: spitviper
» RE: et al. Posted by: spitviper
food choices by adults, not children or industry
Posted by: kerastes on Jul 22, 2005 8:03 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We can expect nothing else but that the food industry will do what is profitable for the food industry and that government will do what is least troublesome for government, but we cannot expect that children will do what is best for themselves, especially in the long run. That's why we don't let children drive hazardous materials trucks, drink whiskey, or run for president. We cannot expect children to make healthy food choices, that's what parents are for. And we cannot expect parents to look after their children when they are in school, that's what school administrators and teachers are for. And when the parent (or any individual) is powerless to do what she or he needs to do, that's what government is for.

I am by no means in favor of government intervention in all our affairs, just the ones in which we are outnumbered and outgunned, such as personal injury lawsuits against big corporations or marketing junk food to children. If we can ban cigarette vending machines in schools, there's no reason we (or our school administrators if they didn't need the money so badly) can't ban junk food vending machines. If we can ban cigarette advertising to children, there's no reason our government can't ban junk food advertising to children. Certainly I believe in the freedom of adults to consume all the junk food they can keep down, but I also believe in their freedom to view pornography. Let's be a bit more careful with our children.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Would you ... Posted by: sugarmagnolia_fl
Why not?
Posted by: WhatNow? on Jul 23, 2005 6:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why not get rid of the minimum age of 19 for tobacco and put cigarette vending machines in schools? It seems if junk food can be pushed why not tobacco and alcohol. At least tobacco won't make you obese.

I am all for freedom of choice at least when you turn 18, but I can not understand why schools would allow vending machines. I never even saw them in high school.

I liked the post about socialism in the US. "socialize the costs and privatize the benefits." It's truly sad that's what we've embraced.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» oops Posted by: WhatNow?
» RE: Why not? Posted by: bornxeyed
Kids would eat fast food anyway
Posted by: FlapJackSeven on Jul 23, 2005 12:30 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Whether there was a government or not. No kidding. Most of the left is against bioloically engineered food, but when the government wants to stop people from eating what they want, the left is all for it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Kids would eat fast food anyway Posted by: verdanteye@yahoo.com
Amazing
Posted by: Kat144 on Jul 23, 2005 11:34 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It amazes me about how people freak out because corporations market junk food to kids.

My parents had a really good tactic for dealing with such things: ACTUALLY SAYING NO TO YOUR CHILD!! Yes, it's true!! I didn't get every little thing I whined for, and I turned out okay!! Wow. Imagine if more parents actually acted like parents and didn't give in to their kid's every whim!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Amazing -Who's your momma? Posted by: bornxeyed
Lately it occurs to me
Posted by: bornxeyed on Jul 24, 2005 6:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm all for personal responsibility, for personal actions and drives we are aware of and can control. Obviously if you aren't aware of some inner drive, for materialism, say, or escape from reality, or something that quenches a psychological need or pain, then you can't really be called responsible for your actions - beyond what limit that some might set for the conscious ability to control these actions. Of course, these limits are not only different for everyone but what is considered a minimal limit is different in each's opinion. And people tend to hold others to the limt they've set for themselves - an "If I can do it you can do it" mentality.

All that said, what has occurred to me is this. Wouldn't it be ironic if all these folks who preach "personal responsibility" and "parental control" as some absolute arbiter of personal action were the most affected by the brainwashing that has become corporate advertising. In that I mean that the false belief in an absolute ability to control yourself and your kids within this environment of corporate manipulation has been instilled in them so utterly, by this very corportate manipulation, that they are unable, themselves, to see how other's ability to withstand the message to "buy,buy,buy", regardless of the effect on their health, is being undermined by the maniupulation.

In fact, these shibboleths of self-indulgency are, themselves, members of the very subgroup they criticize so vehemently - those, who in one way or another, have succumbed to the subliminal messages of ads, one of which is to buy their products and another of which is to feel in control while doing so.

I like to think I haven't falling victim to either. I like to think I buy and eat based on intelligent health and environmental choices with an awareness of consequences and its very very rare I'd resort to something in a mainstream store or fast food joint. And I argue that I understand that some, mayby most, humans, are psychologically unable to resists the onslaught of "education" the advertisers provide, not for any lack in themselves, but precisely because we are all so similar that psychologist have found it easy to learn what pushes our consumer buttons so thoroughly.

But I can't help wondering if I, and, in actuality, everyone who might think like me, haven't unconsciously fallen victim to just a different aspect of this ubiquitous conditioning.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

School food
Posted by: Alaiyo on Jul 24, 2005 9:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree with the comments made about personal responsibilty. My mother also said NO the few times my brother and I wanted to get sugary cereal X because of toy Y. Fast food was a treat, not a meal plan.

I do have to bring up one thing though concerning food and schools. While many kids do have their lunches made for them at home, many others rely on either purchasing lunch or receiving free lunch from their school. Even when I was going to primary school, most of these lunches were not always nutritious. We had pizza every Monday for example. I remember that it was so greasy that in the winter time you could use the overflow to soften your dry hands. And when I say pizza every Monday, I don't mean "You have a choice of pizza or of of turkey sandwich." Granted, it was balanced out by a vegetable. However, the portion size of the vegetable was laughable especially in comparison to the oversize square portion of pizza.

Vending machines were something I admittedly saw in high school, not in primary school, although they were mostly soda machines.

Schools can contril the junk food that they themselves provide to the students. The dirty secret is that schools enjoy the income that vending machines provide. It is cheaper to provide things like pizza and other fattening foods than it is to plan and execute a well balanced meal.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

12 Effective Steps to Nutritional Sanity at Home & Schools
Posted by: Crusader Rabbit on Jul 27, 2005 12:22 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1. Do not buy prepared or junk foods.
2. Join the slow food movement.
3. Take the children with you to the local Farmers' Market to do your weekly shoppong for fruits, vegetables, nuts, juices,organic meats, etc. It will a family outing (exercise away from computer & TV), modeling responible marketing, improve family nutrition).
4. Work hard to get the various school taxes raised in YOUR community so they won't be the desparate victims of the soda vending machines
5. REGULARLY attent the PTA meetings and participate--listen and speak up. (If these meetings are too difficult for both parents to attend, then trade off--one can go to PTA, the other to the Board meetings. If you are a single Mom, find another Mom who is interested in these issues and will either babysit for free to support your participation or will trade off going to the meetings while you babbysit for her on her meeting nights.)
6. REGULARLY attend the School Board meetings--listen and speak up.
7. Let the School Board know that any soda machines or other nutritional sabotage of our children will get you busy to get them un-elected.
8. Persistently advocate for pure water, pure juices and pure foods to be available at school. (NO GMO, antibiotic/hormone contaminated meats, dairy products or eggs)
9. Speak up against accepting money to name athletic fields (or anything else) after a corporation or product.
10. Model responsible nutrition for your children. They watch you and have a well developed radar for hypocracy. The do-as-I-say, not-as-I-do routine doesn't work. (never did)
11. JUST SAY NO! You are the adult and are responsible for making all the decisions in your childrens' lives. Whinning, tempertantrums, sulking and silences are horrible to endure, but they are the price of doing your choosen duty. Giving in to demands is not only endanges their nutritional health, it warps them into horrible people others avoid and find difficult to love. It's about setting thoughtful, REASONABLE limits & then sticking to them. Children get confused without them or if they are inconsistently applied.
12. Become involved in the advocacy for absolute, complete disclosure of all content (e.g., exactly what are those "natural" flavorings? MSG?) and treatment (e.g., irradiation, homromes and antibiotics in growth/production; pesticides/herbicides; etc.) of foods sold to the public.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]