What's really behind the soda industry's 'choice' rhetoric

printer friendlyprinter friendly

Last week, following New York City's public hearing on Mayor Michael Bloomberg's proposal to cap soda sizes at 16 ounces, industry reps and other critics pushed back hard, saying the ban on large portions "restricts choice." The trouble is, those critics don't explain whose choice is really being restricted. And that's because the answer is soda companies'.

Soda companies have long enjoyed extensive freedom over what products they create, market and sell, regardless of the social cost of their choices. In the 1950s, they chose to bottle their sugary beverages in 6.5-ounce containers, touting them as an occasional treat. Today, soda companies choose to inflate portions to 20 ounces and beyond, pushing sales of these oversized drinks by making sure they are cheap and always within arms' reach. Soda companies choose to continually expand their product lines, creating sugar-infused teas and sugary sports drinks; they've even added sugar and calories to water, in spite of research that links sugar-laden beverages to chronic health problems like diabetes and heart disease. They choose to market these unhealthy products disproportionately to low-income communities, communities of color, and youth. And now, in the face of growing public criticism, soda companies are choosing to borrow marketing tactics from the tobacco industry to improve their image and avoid government regulation.

So when soda industry spokespeople and executives argue that Bloomberg's proposal restricts choice, they need to be specific. It restricts industry's choice. It forces soda companies to be accountable to the public, rather than freely allowed to exploit the public. And it puts the public's health ahead of profits, taking a little power away from major corporations and putting it back in the hands of ordinary people.

The public's response to Bloomberg's proposal suggests this shift in power is exactly what people want. According to the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, of the 38,000 written comments the department received regarding the proposal, 32,000 were in support. Looks like people are seeing soda companies' "choice" rhetoric for what it really is: a thinly veiled scare tactic.


new year's resolutions (1) cancer prevention (1) Donald Trump (2) social media (2) seat belt laws (1) personal responsibility rhetoric (1) news monitoring (1) Pine Ridge reservation (1) Whiteclay (4) public health (66) values (1) media (7) community health (1) obesity prevention (1) food access (1) authentic voices (1) product safety (1) ssb (1) equity (3) white house (1) FCC (1) auto safety (1) children's health (3) apha (2) Tea Party (1) media advocacy (21) water security (1) women's health (2) ACEs (2) American Beverage Association (1) food and beverage marketing (3) tobacco industry (2) PepsiCo (1) San Francisco (3) communication (2) nanny state (2) news strategy (1) Let's Move (1) violence (1) cosmetics (1) Big Food (2) SSBs (1) food environment (1) advocacy (3) Oglala Sioux (3) Big Soda (2) media analysis (5) adverse childhood experiences (3) McDonald's (1) institutional accountability (1) childhood obesity (1) alcohol (5) Measure O (1) race (1) suicide nets (1) HPV vaccine (1) naacp (1) education (1) Proposition 47 (1) Big Tobacco (3) weight of the nation (1) stigma (1) indoor smoking ban (1) public health policy (2) food justice (1) regulation (2) child sexual abuse (5) Johnson & Johnson (1) environmental health (1) online marketing (1) health care (1) inequities (1) government intrusion (1) vaccines (1) SB 402 (1) Jerry Sandusky (3) sandusky (2) news analysis (2) diabetes prevention (1) diabetes (1) violence prevention (8) SB 1000 (1) soda warning labels (1) Connecticut shooting (1) Coca-Cola (3) Amanda Fallin (1) Twitter (1) Sam Kass (1) Merck (1) news coverage (1) Campaign for Safe Cosmetics (1) obesity (10) chronic disease (2) personal responsibility (3) privilege (1) target marketing (7) food industry (4) soda (12) sugar-sweetened beverages (2) Proposition 29 (1) food (1) food deserts (1) junk food (2) Texas (1) snap (1) SB-5 (1) election 2016 (1) tobacco (5) physical activity (1) gatorade bolt game (1) sexual assault (1) abortion (1) digital marketing (2) racism (1) prevention (1) filibuster (1) sexual health (1) gender (1) sexism (2) Bill Cosby (1) Food Marketing Workgroup (1) autism (1) framing (14) Joe Paterno (1) Catholic church (1) cap the tap (1) Penn State (3) california (1) Marion Nestle (1) collaboration (1) suicide prevention (2) mental health (2) food swamps (1) Telluride (1) healthy eating (1) language (6) social justice (1) Happy Meals (1) Newtown (1) soda tax (11) choice (1) world water day (1) cigarette advertising (1) childhood obestiy conference (1) health equity (10) news (2) Nickelodeon (1) public health data (1) journalism (1) sugary drinks (10) Colorado (1) liana winett (1) Bloomberg (3) george lakoff (1) Michelle Obama (1) water (1) corporate social responsibility (1) community organizing (1) tobacco control (2) front groups (1) Twitter for advocacy (1) industry appeals to choice (1) Rachel Grana (1) genital warts (1) emergency contraception (1) community violence (1) El Monte (3) soda industry (4) social math (1) structural racism (1) Pine Ridge Indian Reservation (2) gun control (2) paula deen (1) campaign finance (1) Oakland Unified School District (1) childhood trauma (3) political correctness (1) Richmond (5) Aurora (1) community safety (1) sanitation (1) Gardasil (1) marketing (1) childhood lead poisoning (1) elephant triggers (1) sports drinks (1) prison system (1) Citizens United (1) Community Coalition Against Beverage Taxes (1) gun violence (1) suicide barrier (2) cervical cancer (1) messaging (3) Wendy Davis (1) soda taxes (2) beverage industry (2) Chile (1) social change (1) tobacco tax (1) junk food marketing (3) Berkeley (2) democracy (1) sexual violence (2) youth (1) cancer research (1) media bites (1) default frame (1) reproductive justice (1) summer camps (1) paper tigers (1) prison phone calls (1) childhood adversity (1) breastfeeding (3) beauty products (1) measure N (2) food marketing (3) Golden Gate Bridge (2) Dora the Explorer (1) built environment (2) Sandy Hook (2) junk food marketing to kids (2)
  • Follow Us On Facebook
  • Follow Us On Twitter
  • Join Us On Youtube
  • BMSG RSS Feed

get e-alerts in your inbox: