Two anti-obesity initiatives, two approaches: The Walt Disney Co. announced this week that it would not show junk food ads during children’s programming. New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg decreed that a serving ofCoca-Cola is 16 ounces.
If Disney’s move makes it easier to pass up the technicolor sugar bombs marketed as “part of a complete breakfast” — and you can bet it will — then it has done parents and kids a big favor. But Bloomberg’s plan to ban bucket-size sodas from his city makes us want to go out and buy a Big Gulp just for spite.
In a perfect world, of course, parents wouldn’t need Disney’s help to counter the $950 million that advertisers spend each year pitching products to kids under 12. Parents could just say no to the whiny appeals for juice boxes and sugary cereals. They could just say no to television. We don’t live in that world.
Kids’ TV is an endless parade of smiling characters, with commercials barely distinguishable from cartoons for the youngest watchers. Elmo, Mickey, Toucan Sam and Ronald McDonald are all interchangeable friends. A 2005 study by the Center for Science in the Public Interest found that 9 out of 10 ads were for foods the group deemed unhealthy — and 3 out of 4 were pitched by cartoon characters.
The Bloomberg approach to this problem, we suppose, would be to banish Tony the Tiger and his pals from the airwaves. Some consumer groups, in fact, would like the federal government to do just that. To stave off that sort of heavy-handed interference, some food companies voluntarily adopted nutritional standards for products marketed to children. Last year, the Federal Trade Commission issued recommendations for such ads.
Disney’s voluntary ban applies to its TV channels, radio stations and websites that target children. That includes Saturday morning cartoons on ABC, which is owned by Disney. Starting in 2015, after current advertising contracts expire, products will have to meet guidelines patterned after the federal recommendations. The goal is to get kids to eat more fruits and vegetables and less processed sugar, salt and fat.
Disney had already adopted guidelines for foods that can be promoted by its characters. Since 2006, it has served low-fat milk and veggies, instead of fries and soda, as the default sides in kids’ meals sold at its theme parks.
Some restaurant chains around the country have made similar changes.McDonald’sadded apple slices (and subtracted some of the fries) from its Happy Meals. That was after the San Francisco Board of Supervisors outlawed kids’ meals that included toys unless the meals met certain dietary requirements.
Bloomberg seems determined to out-nanny San Francisco. He’s asked his hand-picked Board of Health to ban the bedwetter-size soft drinks in restaurants, delis, sports venues, theaters and anyplace else regulated by the city’s health department.
Starting next year, those establishments won’t be allowed to sell cups or bottles larger than 16 ounces — 4 ounces smaller than the plastic bottles commonly dispensed by vending machines and less than one-third the volume of an Xtreme Big Gulp.
The mayor explained that his proposal won’t hurt businesses because they could just charge more for the smaller drink. Or you could buy two drinks. Or four.
The Big Gulp will actually still be legal, since the ban doesn’t affect grocery or convenience stores. And restaurants still can offer unlimited free refills at self-service fountains — they just can’t issue cups bigger than 16 ounces. Somehow we don’t think this is going to cut soda consumption in a big way. Shouldn’t the mayor be worried about potholes or something?
The average American drinks 43.5 gallons of soda a year. That’s 348 Bloomberg-approved portions. Think of all the calories New Yorkers will burn waddling to and from the refill station, grumbling the whole way about their meddlesome mayor.