Government Abandons Children to Big Food

[Guest guest]

http://www.alternet.org/envirohealth/23648/

 

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.

 

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.

 

The food industry works hard to keep the focus on self-regulatory

mechanisms such as the Children's Advertising Review Unit, the

industry-supported five-person shop that cannot possibly monitor all

the ways that children are bombarded with food marketing these days.

Yet, Elizabeth Lascoutx, director of CARU, presented her organization

as doing a stellar job of monitoring food ads, making several

misleading statements in the process (which seems ironic for the head

of an organization charged with monitoring deceptive advertising). For

example, she said that McDonald's had agreed to alter an ad campaign

to show healthier choices in their children's ads, when in fact, the

company disagreed with CARU's determination that the commercials were

misleading.

 

Coca-Cola also took the opportunity to misrepresent itself. Abigail

Rodgers, vice president of " Wellness Strategies and Communication, "

claimed that the company does not sell soda in elementary schools.

Trouble is, a survey of Kentucky schools revealed that soda is sold in

44 percent of elementary schools. And Coca-Cola was a powerful

lobbying force against four legislative attempts to pass a state bill

to get soda out of schools. But Ms. Rodgers forgot to mention this and

other state bills Coca-Cola has helped kill or weaken, including those

in California, New Mexico, Arizona, Connecticut, Indiana and Oregon.

 

There was precious little opportunity for advocacy representation or

public participation. Only a handful of panel slots were allotted to

public health or children's advocates. Even then, their voices were

drowned out by the likes of PepsiCo and Kraft, who were each given two

separate opportunities to speak, an honor not bestowed on anyone else.

Moreover, questions from the audience were tightly controlled by

government officials, pre-screened by moderators. Only in response to

pressure from advocates did the FTC alter the agenda at the last

minute to include a brief " open forum " at the very end of the day,

after all the reporters and most attendees had already left. Clearly

Uncle Sam was not interested in hearing from the public on this matter.

 

Senator Harkin said he hoped that the meeting would not be just window

dressing, but it turned out to be far worse. The motto of the Federal

Trade Commission is " For the Consumer " but with this meeting, it might

as well have been " For the Industry. " But it is certainly not " For the

Children. "

 

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.