As the anti-obesity battle heats up, restaurants are under increasing fire for the messages they direct at their youngest patrons.
Health advocates have long laid blame for the nation’s growing girth in part on the restaurant industry’s promotion of “junk foods” to children through cartoon icons such as Ronald McDonald and the toys found in kids’ meals. But their scrutiny is expanding to include a broader array of marketing efforts, ranging from social media to in-store materials that might influence those under the age of 18.
That attention — and the threat of regulatory intervention — is prompting action from the industry. In July McDonald’s USA announced plans to include more fruit and fewer fries in all Happy Meals and set goals for reducing sodium, sugar and saturated fat across the menu.
The same month, the National Restaurant Association launched a program called “Kids LiveWell” to showcase the more healthful dining options available for children at restaurant chains. And an industry group called the Children’s Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative, or CFBAI, ramped up its efforts to self-regulate by unveiling stricter nutrition standards for foods marketed to kids under the age of 12. McDonald’s and Burger King are part of that effort.
Meanwhile, a coalition of federal agencies called the Interagency Working Group on Food Marketed to Children, or IWG, is developing guidelines that would restrict the types of foods that could be marketed to those age 17 and under. Although the guidelines are designed to be voluntary, the NRA has strongly opposed them, saying they would be “unduly strict and difficult, if not impossible to achieve” and could set the stage for regulation at the state and local level.
Criticism is mounting
In the debate about turning around rising obesity rates, researchers increasingly point to food marketing as a place to start.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that about 12.5 million children ages 2 to 19, or 17 percent, are obese — almost three times the number in 1980. Agency officials put some blame on the foods marketed to children, arguing that advertising of healthful alternatives is almost nonexistent.
The American Academy of Pediatrics, or AAP, agrees, saying that “sufficient evidence exists to warrant a ban on junk-food or fast-food advertising in children’s TV programming.”
In an AAP policy statement released in June, doctors contended that ads for junk food and fast food increased kids’ desire for such foods. Studies show that snacking while watching TV and late-night screen time can put children at higher risk for obesity and interfere with sleep.
“American society couldn’t do a worse job at the moment of keeping children fit and healthy — too much TV, too many food ads, not enough exercise and not enough sleep,” said Victor Strasburger, a member of the AAP Council on Communications and Media and lead author of the statement.
Restaurant operators say they are working hard to offer more healthful options in response to growing consumer demand.
McDonald’s has pledged to revamp its Happy Meals, making apples or other fruit an automatic option and shrinking the portion of fries to bring total calories for the meal under 600. In addition, the chain plans to reduce sodium levels across the menu by 15 percent by 2015, and to further reduce sodium, added sugar and saturated fats by 2020.
McDonald’s said it is also striving for more transparency. Customers can download a mobile-device app for nutrition information on all items. And the chain said it is creating an advisory board of parents and experts to develop nutrition messages for kids. Officials will tour the nation this fall conducting town-hall-style meetings to get input on nutrition.
McDonald’s move was praised by anti-obesity activists, including the Center for Science in the Public Interest, or CSPI, which sued the chain in December 2010 for offering toys in Happy Meals, arguing that it trained children to eat badly. At press time it was unclear whether CSPI would drop the lawsuit as a result of McDonald’s planned changes.
Margo Wootan, CSPI’s director of nutrition policy, said the move by McDonald’s was an “important step in the right direction” toward changing public perception of what a kids’ meal should be.
The NRA’s Kids LiveWell initiative is also aimed at changing public perception. So far, 19 chains representing about 15,000 restaurants have pledged to offer and promote to children menu items that meet certain nutritional standards. The program was developed with Healthy Dining, an organization that helps diners find dietitian-approved dishes on restaurant menus.
Participating brands in the Kids LiveWell program include Au Bon Pain, Bonefish Grill, Burger King, Burgerville, Carrabba’s Italian Grill, Chevys, Chili’s, Corner Bakery Cafe, Cracker Barrel, Denny’s, El Pollo Loco, Friendly’s, IHOP, Joe’s Crab Shack, Outback Steakhouse, Silver Diner, Sizzler, T-Bones Great American Eatery and zpizza.
The Kids LiveWell standards for healthful kids’ meal options are: fewer than 600 calories; two servings of fruit, vegetables, whole grains, lean protein and/or low-fat dairy; and limits on sodium, fat and sugar content. Side dishes must have 200 calories or fewer, with limits on fat, sugar and sodium content. They must also offer a serving of fruit, vegetables, whole grains, lean protein and/or low-fat dairy.
For Costa Mesa, Calif.-based El Pollo Loco, the program offers an opportunity to upgrade and promote its kids’ meals, said Mark Hardison, the chain’s vice president of marketing.
“We have kids’ meals now, but they’re not that popular, so we think there’s an opportunity to improve,” he said.
Menu items that would meet Kids LiveWell standards are under development.
Anita Jones-Mueller, founder of Healthy Dining and a contributor to Nation’s Restaurant News, expects more brands to join Kids LiveWell. But, she added, just as important as restaurant participation is the need for “a significant focus and effort on education and on stimulating consumer demand.”
Are the efforts enough?
The nutrition landscape has improved, but “it just hasn’t improved enough,” said Jeff McIntyre, director of national policy for Children Now, a San Francisco-based health and education advocacy group.
Children Now is encouraged by “baby steps” like Kids LiveWell, he said, but the group would like to see the industry put more marketing muscle behind better-for-you options.
Self-regulation might be ideal, he said, but the industry so far has proven reluctant to “have an open conversation” about ways to promote meaningful change.
McIntyre pointed to CFBAI, a voluntary program developed by the Council of Better Business Bureaus in 2006 to respond to the call for more responsible food advertising to children. Initially, participating companies developed their own nutrition criteria, approved by the CBBB, for marketing more healthful items.
Those guidelines appeared to result in little change, McIntyre said. In 2009 research, Children Now found that nearly three out of four foods advertised on TV to kids were for products in the poorest nutritional categories.
The standards announced in July are stricter. Elaine Kolish, vice president of the CBBB, called them “tough but feasible.”
Currently, one in three products marketed to kids would not meet the standards, she said, but participating companies are pledging to reformulate products or stop advertising them to kids by the end of 2013.
Entrées must have no more than 350 calories, with 10 percent of calories from saturated fat, as well as less than 600 milligrams of sodium and 15 grams of sugar per serving. And kids’ meals should have fewer than 600 calories, less than 740 milligrams of sodium and include at least two servings of fruit or vegetables.
Most of the 17 participants in CFBAI are packaged-food companies, but McDonald’s and Burger King have signed on.
Jon Leibowitz, Federal Trade Commission chair, in a statement called the CFBAI’s new standards “exactly the type of initiative the commission had in mind when we started pushing for self-regulation more than five years ago.”
Looking for compromise
Still pending are the guidelines proposed by the IWG, a coalition that represents the FTC, the CDC, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
The comment period for the proposed rules ended in July, and the group is expected to review the input and issue final recommendations to Congress before year’s end. The guidelines would go into effect in 2016.
The IWG proposal establishes nutrition standards for foods marketed to kids 17 and younger and encourages a marketing environment that supports more healthful eating by children.
The IWG proposal defines marketing to children much more broadly than CFBAI, from the sponsoring of sports teams to children’s charities, according to the NRA’s comments, which call for the guidelines to be withdrawn.
“The measure could require quick-service restaurants to serve children’s meals in plain bags or boxes,” the NRA said in a statement. “Place mats that appeal to children may not be allowed unless a meal met strict standards.”
The proposed rules would also require a reformulation of products that would make it harder to sell them, the NRA contended.
The NRA also noted there’s no evidence to show that the marketing standards would cause kids and teens to eat better and lose weight.
Wootan of CSPI said the IWG standards are more “science based” and represent what’s best for children’s health. By comparison, the CFBAI standards represent what’s best for the industry, she said.
“We need to meet somewhere in between,” she said.
Contact Lisa Jennings at lisa.jennings@penton.com.
