

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Years ago, the environmental movement coined the term "greenwashing" to describe how corporations use public relations to make themselves appear environmentally friendly. Now, nutrition advocates need their own moniker for a similar trend among major food companies -- call it "nutri-washing."
With rising rates of obesity, diabetes and other diet-related health problems, Big Food has responded to increasing public criticism with announcements of improved products, along with assertions of being "part of the solution" -- knowing full well they are a cause of the problem.
Most of the criticism is leveled at companies who especially target children, with McDonald's taking much of this heat. So, in recent months the fast-food giant (though it denies any connection) has taken pains to prove it really does care. For example, in April, with Secretary of Health and Human Services Tommy Thompson on hand, McDonald's announced a "Balanced Lifestyle Platform," promising to provide nutrition information on Happy Meals and volunteering to "take an industry-leading role" to work with HHS on "the best way to communicate nutrition information to consumers." Do we really want the folks who invented the 600-calorie Big Mac and supersizing volunteering for this job?
The company also pledged to distribute free copies of an educational program called "What's on Your Plate, featuring Willie Munchright" that teaches "elementary schoolchildren the importance of physical activity and making smart food choices." What a great way to get free marketing in schools while increasing brand recognition among impressionable children. Also, the common tactic of promoting physical activity is cleverly designed to deflect attention away from children eating too much of industry's unhealthy food.
Other food conglomerates feeling the heat are also jumping on the corporate responsibility bandwagon. For example, PepsiCo has created a Web site (www.healthispower.net) devoted to convincing you that it cares about children's health. Yet the site claims that "kid-friendly" school snacks such as Doritos and Pepsi are "part of a balanced diet." The food and beverage giant also recently announced the introduction of the Smart Spot symbol, a small green circle that will carry the message "Smart Choices Made Easy" and will appear on such "healthy products" as Diet Pepsi and Baked Lays. But labeling a food healthy does not make it so. Even diet sodas and baked chips have virtually no nutritional value and only serve to divert consumers' attention from wholesome foods.
Some nutrition advocates have applauded such efforts as an attempt by industry to make improvements, however minor. But to praise companies for such "reforms" too easily rewards them with the positive public-relations spin they seek. Also, these voluntary actions deliberately attempt to deflect any mandatory government regulations -- for, as we are starting to learn, voluntary acts can easily be rescinded.
In June, for example, less than a year after Kraft Foods vowed to reduce portion sizes in the name of public health, the company said it would change nutrition labeling instead. The company did release recently "100 calorie packs" of Oreos, Chips Ahoy and Cheese Nips, thus turning reduced portion sizes into a clever marketing gimmick. But 100-calorie junk food is still junk. Similarly, a 2002 promise by McDonald's to remove artery-clogging trans fats from its cooking oil, which gained the company a tremendous amount of free PR (including a front-page story in The Chronicle), has yet to be fulfilled.
Moreover, these PR efforts don't tell the whole story. Behind the scenes, industry is lobbying hard to undermine public-health advocacy, especially that aimed at improving the nutrition environment of public schools. For example, last year, California lawmakers tried to ban the sale of sodas in schools, but heavy lobbying from the soda industry resulted in an exemption for high schools (where, not coincidentally, most soda is sold). Just last month, California legislation that would have set nutrition guidelines on foods sold in schools was narrowly defeated, despite having the support of 80 health and education organizations, thanks to last-minute lobbying by the junk-food industry.
Educated consumers won't be fooled by all the slick packaging and press releases. They know better than to rely on the processed food industry for healthful eating. The highest quality nutrition is found in whole foods, such as fresh fruits and vegetables, not in cans or boxes. That's how nature planned it, long before Big Food intervened. No matter how hard they try to convince you otherwise, the food and beverage industries have only their own best interests at heart. The rest is just a bunch of nutri-wash.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Years ago, the environmental movement coined the term "greenwashing" to describe how corporations use public relations to make themselves appear environmentally friendly. Now, nutrition advocates need their own moniker for a similar trend among major food companies -- call it "nutri-washing."
With rising rates of obesity, diabetes and other diet-related health problems, Big Food has responded to increasing public criticism with announcements of improved products, along with assertions of being "part of the solution" -- knowing full well they are a cause of the problem.
Most of the criticism is leveled at companies who especially target children, with McDonald's taking much of this heat. So, in recent months the fast-food giant (though it denies any connection) has taken pains to prove it really does care. For example, in April, with Secretary of Health and Human Services Tommy Thompson on hand, McDonald's announced a "Balanced Lifestyle Platform," promising to provide nutrition information on Happy Meals and volunteering to "take an industry-leading role" to work with HHS on "the best way to communicate nutrition information to consumers." Do we really want the folks who invented the 600-calorie Big Mac and supersizing volunteering for this job?
The company also pledged to distribute free copies of an educational program called "What's on Your Plate, featuring Willie Munchright" that teaches "elementary schoolchildren the importance of physical activity and making smart food choices." What a great way to get free marketing in schools while increasing brand recognition among impressionable children. Also, the common tactic of promoting physical activity is cleverly designed to deflect attention away from children eating too much of industry's unhealthy food.
Other food conglomerates feeling the heat are also jumping on the corporate responsibility bandwagon. For example, PepsiCo has created a Web site (www.healthispower.net) devoted to convincing you that it cares about children's health. Yet the site claims that "kid-friendly" school snacks such as Doritos and Pepsi are "part of a balanced diet." The food and beverage giant also recently announced the introduction of the Smart Spot symbol, a small green circle that will carry the message "Smart Choices Made Easy" and will appear on such "healthy products" as Diet Pepsi and Baked Lays. But labeling a food healthy does not make it so. Even diet sodas and baked chips have virtually no nutritional value and only serve to divert consumers' attention from wholesome foods.
Some nutrition advocates have applauded such efforts as an attempt by industry to make improvements, however minor. But to praise companies for such "reforms" too easily rewards them with the positive public-relations spin they seek. Also, these voluntary actions deliberately attempt to deflect any mandatory government regulations -- for, as we are starting to learn, voluntary acts can easily be rescinded.
In June, for example, less than a year after Kraft Foods vowed to reduce portion sizes in the name of public health, the company said it would change nutrition labeling instead. The company did release recently "100 calorie packs" of Oreos, Chips Ahoy and Cheese Nips, thus turning reduced portion sizes into a clever marketing gimmick. But 100-calorie junk food is still junk. Similarly, a 2002 promise by McDonald's to remove artery-clogging trans fats from its cooking oil, which gained the company a tremendous amount of free PR (including a front-page story in The Chronicle), has yet to be fulfilled.
Moreover, these PR efforts don't tell the whole story. Behind the scenes, industry is lobbying hard to undermine public-health advocacy, especially that aimed at improving the nutrition environment of public schools. For example, last year, California lawmakers tried to ban the sale of sodas in schools, but heavy lobbying from the soda industry resulted in an exemption for high schools (where, not coincidentally, most soda is sold). Just last month, California legislation that would have set nutrition guidelines on foods sold in schools was narrowly defeated, despite having the support of 80 health and education organizations, thanks to last-minute lobbying by the junk-food industry.
Educated consumers won't be fooled by all the slick packaging and press releases. They know better than to rely on the processed food industry for healthful eating. The highest quality nutrition is found in whole foods, such as fresh fruits and vegetables, not in cans or boxes. That's how nature planned it, long before Big Food intervened. No matter how hard they try to convince you otherwise, the food and beverage industries have only their own best interests at heart. The rest is just a bunch of nutri-wash.
Years ago, the environmental movement coined the term "greenwashing" to describe how corporations use public relations to make themselves appear environmentally friendly. Now, nutrition advocates need their own moniker for a similar trend among major food companies -- call it "nutri-washing."
With rising rates of obesity, diabetes and other diet-related health problems, Big Food has responded to increasing public criticism with announcements of improved products, along with assertions of being "part of the solution" -- knowing full well they are a cause of the problem.
Most of the criticism is leveled at companies who especially target children, with McDonald's taking much of this heat. So, in recent months the fast-food giant (though it denies any connection) has taken pains to prove it really does care. For example, in April, with Secretary of Health and Human Services Tommy Thompson on hand, McDonald's announced a "Balanced Lifestyle Platform," promising to provide nutrition information on Happy Meals and volunteering to "take an industry-leading role" to work with HHS on "the best way to communicate nutrition information to consumers." Do we really want the folks who invented the 600-calorie Big Mac and supersizing volunteering for this job?
The company also pledged to distribute free copies of an educational program called "What's on Your Plate, featuring Willie Munchright" that teaches "elementary schoolchildren the importance of physical activity and making smart food choices." What a great way to get free marketing in schools while increasing brand recognition among impressionable children. Also, the common tactic of promoting physical activity is cleverly designed to deflect attention away from children eating too much of industry's unhealthy food.
Other food conglomerates feeling the heat are also jumping on the corporate responsibility bandwagon. For example, PepsiCo has created a Web site (www.healthispower.net) devoted to convincing you that it cares about children's health. Yet the site claims that "kid-friendly" school snacks such as Doritos and Pepsi are "part of a balanced diet." The food and beverage giant also recently announced the introduction of the Smart Spot symbol, a small green circle that will carry the message "Smart Choices Made Easy" and will appear on such "healthy products" as Diet Pepsi and Baked Lays. But labeling a food healthy does not make it so. Even diet sodas and baked chips have virtually no nutritional value and only serve to divert consumers' attention from wholesome foods.
Some nutrition advocates have applauded such efforts as an attempt by industry to make improvements, however minor. But to praise companies for such "reforms" too easily rewards them with the positive public-relations spin they seek. Also, these voluntary actions deliberately attempt to deflect any mandatory government regulations -- for, as we are starting to learn, voluntary acts can easily be rescinded.
In June, for example, less than a year after Kraft Foods vowed to reduce portion sizes in the name of public health, the company said it would change nutrition labeling instead. The company did release recently "100 calorie packs" of Oreos, Chips Ahoy and Cheese Nips, thus turning reduced portion sizes into a clever marketing gimmick. But 100-calorie junk food is still junk. Similarly, a 2002 promise by McDonald's to remove artery-clogging trans fats from its cooking oil, which gained the company a tremendous amount of free PR (including a front-page story in The Chronicle), has yet to be fulfilled.
Moreover, these PR efforts don't tell the whole story. Behind the scenes, industry is lobbying hard to undermine public-health advocacy, especially that aimed at improving the nutrition environment of public schools. For example, last year, California lawmakers tried to ban the sale of sodas in schools, but heavy lobbying from the soda industry resulted in an exemption for high schools (where, not coincidentally, most soda is sold). Just last month, California legislation that would have set nutrition guidelines on foods sold in schools was narrowly defeated, despite having the support of 80 health and education organizations, thanks to last-minute lobbying by the junk-food industry.
Educated consumers won't be fooled by all the slick packaging and press releases. They know better than to rely on the processed food industry for healthful eating. The highest quality nutrition is found in whole foods, such as fresh fruits and vegetables, not in cans or boxes. That's how nature planned it, long before Big Food intervened. No matter how hard they try to convince you otherwise, the food and beverage industries have only their own best interests at heart. The rest is just a bunch of nutri-wash.