July, 29 2014, 11:30am EDT
International Coalition Urges McDonald's CEO to Make Good on His Word & Ban Ronald McDonald from Schools
Advocacy groups around the world are urging McDonald's CEO, Don Thompson, to stand by his assertion that Ronald McDonald does not make appearances in schools. At McDonald's 2014 Annual Shareholder Meeting, Mr. Thompson said, "in schools and our restaurants you never see Ronald McDonald." He named exceptions to the policy in restaurants, but not in schools.
BOSTON
Advocacy groups around the world are urging McDonald's CEO, Don Thompson, to stand by his assertion that Ronald McDonald does not make appearances in schools. At McDonald's 2014 Annual Shareholder Meeting, Mr. Thompson said, "in schools and our restaurants you never see Ronald McDonald." He named exceptions to the policy in restaurants, but not in schools. Yet Ronald McDonald does, in fact, regularly appear in schools around the world and many regional McDonald's websites advertise the fast food mascot's availability for school visits.
In a letter written and organized by Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood (United States) and Instituto Alana (Brazil), a coalition of 48 public health, education, and children's organizations asked Mr. Thompson to widely publicize McDonald's new policy that Ronald McDonald will not be seen in schools and update the company's pledge with the United States Council of Better Business Bureaus' Children's Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative. The coalition also urged Mr. Thompson to clearly convey this policy to the company's local franchises and regional marketing associations around the world to ensure that Ronald McDonald no longer promotes the McDonald's brand to captive audiences of schoolchildren.
"The public statement by Mr. Thompson, McDonald's CEO, appears to indicate that he recognizes that schools are not an appropriate forum for promoting the McDonald's brand," said Jennifer Harris, Director of Marketing Initiatives at the Yale Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity. "However, he must be unaware that Ronald McDonald regularly visits schools and that local franchises actively promote these visits. For example, a web page entitled 'School Shows with Ronald McDonald' for the Houston area states that 'Ronald McDonald would love to visit your students and perform an educational school show.' We urge Mr. Thompson to stand by his words and end this common McDonald's marketing practice that takes advantage of a captive audience of young children."
Despite Mr. Thompson's remarks in June, McDonald's websites continue to advertise Ronald McDonald's availability for schools. CCFC and Alana also found dozens of recent examples of in-school appearances by Ronald McDonald. For example, in February 2014, he appeared before over 350 students at Carl Sandburg Elementary School in Joliet, Illinois and on March 28, 2014 he performed two shows at Southern Elementary School in Falmouth, Kentucky. The coalition has also documented Ronald McDonald appearances in elementary schools and preschools in other countries, including China, Australia, The Netherlands, and Brazil.
For Isabella Henriques, Director of the Children and Consumption Project at Alana, Ronald McDonald visits to schools are not only exploitative but a violation of Brazilian regulations: "Children can't discern advertising from content. In schools, it becomes even more unclear for them--after all, it's as if the institution validated the brand. For us, advertising in schools should be absolutely unacceptable--as clearly stated by the 163 Conanda resolution. In other words, such an action is incompliant with Brazilian Standards and Regulations."
Added Oliver Huizinga, Campaigner for the consumer rights organization foodwatch International, Europe, "Should a fox keep the geese? Of course not. Schools must become ad-free zones and McDonald's should immediately stop all activities at schools. 40 million overweight children under the age of 5 worldwide are highly alerting--we have to create healthy environments for children. McDonald's is part of this problem and not the solution."
"School visits by junk food mascots undermine my efforts as parent to instill healthy eating habits in my children," said Casey Hinds of US Healthy Kids. "Ronald McDonald is the Joe Camel of fast food and represents an unhealthy brand. It is time to stop using schools to increase profits for a company that contributes to rising rates of Type 2 diabetes, fatty liver disease, and obesity in children."
In the United Kingdom, Malcolm Clark, Co-ordinator of Sustain's Children's Food Campaign, said, "Schools should be healthy havens where children are free from the messages and pressures of the food industry to consume their products. Whether it is the food that is served, branded teaching materials, or sponsored sports equipment there should be no place for the companies whose core business is to sell us food and drink that is often high in fat, sugar, and salt. That means no Ronald McDonald anywhere near schools. And it should also mean government rules in place to protect children from such junk food marketing beyond the school gates too."
"As CEO of McDonald's, Don Thompson faces a critical choice," said CCFC's Executive Director, Dr. Susan Linn. "He can respect the wishes of the international public health community and ensure that the company's franchises live up to his word. Or he can damage his own credibility and the McDonald's brand by continuing to allow the inappropriate use of Ronald McDonald as a marketing vehicle in schools around the world. We urge him to do the right thing."
The complete text of the coalition letter to CEO Thompson can be found at https://www.commercialfreechildhood.org/mcdonalds.
Fairplay, formerly known as Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood, educates the public about commercialism's impact on kids' wellbeing and advocates for the end of child-targeted marketing. Fairplay organizes parents to hold corporations accountable for their marketing practices, advocates for policies to protect kids, and works with parents and professionals to reduce children's screen time.
LATEST NEWS
Congressional Progressives Unveil 'Bold' Agenda for Second Biden Term
The Congressional Progressive Caucus says its legislative blueprint for 2025 and beyond aims to "deliver equality, justice, and economic security for working people."
Apr 18, 2024
The Congressional Progressive Caucus on Thursday published a "comprehensive domestic policy legislative agenda" for U.S. President Joe Biden's possible second White House term that seeks to "deliver equality, justice, and economic security for working people."
The CPC's Progressive Proposition Agenda is a seven-point plan aimed at lowering the cost of living, boosting wages and worker power, advancing justice, combating climate change and protecting the environment, strengthening democracy, breaking the corporate stranglehold on the economy, and bolstering public education.
"Progressives are proud to have been part of the most significant Democratic legislative accomplishments of this century. We have made real progress for everyday Americans—but there's much more work to be done," Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) said in a statement.
"That's why the Progressive Caucus has identified these popular, populist, and possible solutions," she added. "Democrats in Congress can meet the urgent needs people are facing; rewrite the rules to ensure majorities of this country are no longer barred from the American promise of equality, justice, and economic opportunity; and motivate people with a vision of progressive governance under Democratic majorities in the House and Senate and a Democratic White House."
Progressive lawmakers have already introduced bills for many items on the agenda, including a Green New Deal for Public Schools, expanding the Supreme Court, comprehensive voting rights protection, and legalizing marijuana.
Critics noted the conspicuous absence of Medicare for All—once a top progressive agenda item—and foreign policy issues including ending Israel's genocide, apartheid, occupation, settler colonization, and ethnic cleansing in Palestine.
Jayapal toldNBC News that the CPC is focusing its blueprint exclusively on domestic goals—especially ones it feels can be achieved.
"The way we came to this agenda is to say that we were going to put into this agenda things that were populist and possible... and affected a huge number of people," she said. "We haven't taken a position on particularly Israel and Gaza in the progressive caucus, and so that's not on here."
The CPC agenda is backed by a wide range of labor, climate, environmental, civil rights, consumer, faith-based, and other organizations.
"The Congressional Progressive Caucus is leading the way for Congress to address the major issues affecting working families, from reducing healthcare and housing costs to strengthening workers' rights to join unions, earn living wages and benefits, and have safe workplaces," Service Employees International Union president Mary Kay Henry said in a statement.
"SEIU is proud to partner with the CPC to move these priorities forward and build a more equitable economy in which corporations are held accountable for their actions," she added.
Mary Small, chief strategy officer at Indivisible, said: "House progressives were the engine at the heart of our legislative accomplishments in 2021 and 2022. They've continued that momentum to be true governing partners to the Biden administration as those laws and programs are implemented."
"That's why Indivisible is so supportive of the CPC's Proposition Agenda, a bold vision for progressive governance in 2025 and beyond. From reproductive rights to saving our democracy to economic security for all, the CPC is driving forward exactly the sort of legislative goals we want to see in our next governing moment."
That moment is far from guaranteed, with not only the White House hanging in the balance as Biden will all but certainly face former Republican President Donald Trump in November's election but also the Senate Democratic Caucus clinging to a single-seat advantage over the GOP. Republicans currently hold the House of Representatives by a five-seat margin.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'McCarthyism Is Alive and Well': Google Fires 28 for Protesting Israel Contract
"These mass, illegal firings will not stop us," said organizers. "Make no mistake, we will continue organizing until the company drops Project Nimbus and stops powering this genocide."
Apr 18, 2024
The peace coalition No Tech for Apartheid accused Google of a "flagrant act of retaliation" late Wednesday night as the Silicon Valley giant announced it had fired 28 workers over protests against its cloud services contract with the Israeli government.
The firings came after Google organizers held two 10-hour sit-ins at the company's offices in Sunnyvale, California and New York City, demanding the termination of Project Nimbus, a $1.2 billion contract under which Google and Amazon provide cloud infrastructure and data services for Israel—without any oversight regarding whether the Israel Defense Forces uses the services in its occupation of Palestinian territories and bombardment of Gaza.
Workers have denounced Project Nimbus since it was announced in 2021, but Israel's killing of at least 33,970 Palestinians in Gaza since October and its intentional starvation of civilians led employees to escalate their protests.
No Tech for Apartheid said in a statement that Google officials called the police to both offices to arrest nine protesters—dubbed the Nimbus Nine—on Tuesday morning, before utilizing "a dragnet of in-office surveillance" to fire nearly two dozen other employees on Wednesday.
"They punished all of the workers they could associate with this action in wholesale firings," said the coalition, which includes Jewish Voice for Peace and MPower Change, a Muslim-led anti-war group.
Google accused the workers of "bullying," "harassment," defacing property, and physically impeding other employees—allegations No Tech for Apartheid rejected as it noted organizers "have yet to hear from a single executive about" their concerns over Google's collaboration with Israel.
"This excuse to avoid confronting us and our concerns directly, and attempt to justify its illegal, retaliatory firings, is a lie," said the workers. "Even the workers who were participating in a peaceful sit-in and refusing to leave did not damage property or threaten other workers. Instead they received an overwhelmingly positive response and shows of support."
The organizers staged the sit-ins on the heels of reporting in Time magazine about new negotiations between Google and the Israeli government regarding further potential tech contracts.
Kate J. Sim, a child safety policy adviser at Google who said she was among those fired this week, said the terminations show "how terrified [executives] are of worker power."
Google employees have a history of harnessing worker power to change policies at the company. In 2018, Google terminated a deal with the U.S. Defense Department to develop drone and artificial intelligence (AI) technology through a contract called Project Maven. The decision followed the resignations of several employees and the condemnation of thousands of workers.
Calling Google CEO Sundar Pichai and Google Cloud CEO Thomas Kurian "genocide profiteers," No Tech for Apartheid said Wednesday that they will not stop demonstrating against Project Nimbus until they get a similar result.
"The truth is clear: Google is terrified of us," said the group. "They are terrified of workers coming together and calling for accountability and transparency from our bosses... The corporation is trying to downplay and discredit our power.
"These mass, illegal firings will not stop us," No Tech for Apartheid added. "On the contrary, they only serve as further fuel for the growth of this movement. Make no mistake, we will continue organizing until the company drops Project Nimbus and stops powering this genocide."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Amid Spying Fight, House Passes Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act
"As FANFSA and the 702 reauthorization move to the Senate, lawmakers in that chamber need to take a stand for the rights of people in the United States," said one advocate.
Apr 17, 2024
While applauding the U.S. House of Representatives' bipartisan passage of a bill to ensure that "law enforcement and intelligence agencies can't do an end-run around the Constitution by buying information from data brokers" on Wednesday, privacy advocates highlighted that Congress is trying to extend and expand a long-abused government spying program.
The House voted 219-199 for Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act (FANFSA), which won support from 96 Democrats and 123 Republicans, including the lead sponsor, Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio). Named for the constitutional amendment that protects against unreasonable searches and seizures, H.R. 4639 would close what campaigners call the data broker loophole.
"The privacy violations that flow from law enforcement entities circumventing the Fourth Amendment undermine civil liberties, free expression, and our ability to control what happens to our data," said Free Press Action policy counsel Jenna Ruddock. "These impacts affect everyone who uses digital platforms that extract our personal information any time we open a browser or visit social media and other websites—even when we go to events like demonstrations and other places with our phones revealing our locations."
"We're grateful that the House passed these vital and popular protections," she added. "The bill would prevent flagrant abuses of our privacy by government authorities in league with unscrupulous third-party data brokers. Making this legislation into law with Senate passage too would be a decisive and long-overdue action against government misuse of this clandestine business sector that traffics in our personal data for profit."
Wednesday's vote followed the House sending the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act to the Senate. H.R. 7888 would reauthorize Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which allows for warrantless spying on noncitizens abroad but also sweeps up Americans' data.
The House notably included an amendment forcing a wide range of individuals and businesses to cooperate with government spying operations but rejected an amendment that would have added a warrant requirement to the bill, which the Senate could vote on as soon as Thursday.
Noting those decisions on the FISA reauthorization legislation, Ruddock stressed that "today's vote is a victory but follows a recent loss and ongoing threat as that Section 702 bill moves to the Senate this week too."
"As FANFSA and the 702 reauthorization move to the Senate, lawmakers in that chamber need to take a stand for the rights of people in the United States," she argued. "That means passing FANFSA and reforming Section 702 authority—and prioritizing everyone's First and Fourth Amendment rights."
Jeramie Scott, senior counsel and director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center's Project on Surveillance Oversight, also praised the House's FANFSA passage on Wednesday.
"The passage of the Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale underscores the extent to which reining in abusive warrantless surveillance is a bipartisan issue," Scott said. "We urge the Senate to take up this measure and close the data broker loophole."
Kia Hamadanchy, senior policy counsel at ACLU, similarly said Wednesday that "the bipartisan passage of this bill is a flashing warning sign to the government that if it wants our data, it must get a warrant."
Hamadanchy added that "we hope this vote puts a fire under the Senate to protect their constituents and rein in the government's warrantless surveillance of Americans, once and for all."
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), a critic of the pending 702 bill and FANFSA's lead sponsor in the upper chamber, called the the House's Wednesday vote "a huge win for privacy" and said that "now it's time for the Senate to follow suit."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular