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.


Oakland Unified School District (1) water (1) collaboration (1) language (6) public health policy (2) weight of the nation (1) community safety (1) digital marketing (2) media advocacy (20) Wendy Davis (1) environmental health (1) suicide nets (1) soda (12) marketing (1) food deserts (1) cosmetics (1) Sam Kass (1) food justice (1) Johnson & Johnson (1) social justice (1) industry appeals to choice (1) personal responsibility rhetoric (1) HPV vaccine (1) diabetes (1) sexual assault (1) social change (1) Aurora (1) community health (1) summer camps (1) Richmond (5) sexual violence (2) cancer research (1) water security (1) cigarette advertising (1) alcohol (5) chronic disease (2) sugar-sweetened beverages (2) tobacco industry (2) autism (1) Happy Meals (1) social math (1) ssb (1) Nickelodeon (1) media (6) youth (1) public health (65) childhood trauma (3) Chile (1) obesity prevention (1) Michelle Obama (1) political correctness (1) front groups (1) food (1) beverage industry (2) news monitoring (1) choice (1) framing (13) health equity (10) junk food (2) product safety (1) Pine Ridge Indian Reservation (2) breastfeeding (3) communication (2) Newtown (1) SB 402 (1) junk food marketing (3) gatorade bolt game (1) news analysis (2) prevention (1) default frame (1) sexual health (1) world water day (1) sanitation (1) Dora the Explorer (1) Donald Trump (1) food swamps (1) soda industry (4) SB-5 (1) news strategy (1) junk food marketing to kids (2) online marketing (1) child sexual abuse (5) california (1) American Beverage Association (1) advocacy (3) soda warning labels (1) messaging (3) community violence (1) food access (1) values (1) news (2) Connecticut shooting (1) regulation (2) gun control (2) privilege (1) Twitter (1) food environment (1) children's health (3) violence (1) soda tax (11) Rachel Grana (1) health care (1) tobacco (5) gender (1) Gardasil (1) indoor smoking ban (1) tobacco control (2) Bloomberg (3) Bill Cosby (1) Texas (1) ACEs (2) filibuster (1) sugary drinks (10) george lakoff (1) physical activity (1) Twitter for advocacy (1) Big Soda (2) gun violence (1) government intrusion (1) Proposition 29 (1) Proposition 47 (1) public health data (1) Big Food (2) new year's resolutions (1) prison phone calls (1) Merck (1) elephant triggers (1) Joe Paterno (1) Berkeley (2) Catholic church (1) childhood adversity (1) built environment (2) sandusky (2) Penn State (3) snap (1) measure N (2) Sandy Hook (2) suicide barrier (2) auto safety (1) news coverage (1) sexism (2) FCC (1) Pine Ridge reservation (1) tobacco tax (1) Let's Move (1) Golden Gate Bridge (2) institutional accountability (1) naacp (1) paula deen (1) Community Coalition Against Beverage Taxes (1) prison system (1) campaign finance (1) mental health (2) Measure O (1) suicide prevention (2) emergency contraception (1) media bites (1) structural racism (1) genital warts (1) Food Marketing Workgroup (1) food industry (4) corporate social responsibility (1) food and beverage marketing (3) Colorado (1) cervical cancer (1) abortion (1) adverse childhood experiences (3) SSBs (1) Oglala Sioux (3) SB 1000 (1) Campaign for Safe Cosmetics (1) Whiteclay (4) Tea Party (1) PepsiCo (1) McDonald's (1) food marketing (3) Big Tobacco (3) violence prevention (8) media analysis (5) Amanda Fallin (1) personal responsibility (3) paper tigers (1) stigma (1) Jerry Sandusky (3) diabetes prevention (1) social media (2) beauty products (1) racism (1) childhood obesity (1) reproductive justice (1) white house (1) nanny state (2) education (1) healthy eating (1) equity (3) childhood obestiy conference (1) Marion Nestle (1) women's health (2) cap the tap (1) inequities (1) vaccines (1) childhood lead poisoning (1) apha (2) Citizens United (1) El Monte (3) obesity (10) seat belt laws (1) sports drinks (1) Telluride (1) Coca-Cola (3) race (1) cancer prevention (1) liana winett (1) target marketing (7) San Francisco (3)
  • Follow Us On Facebook
  • Follow Us On Twitter
  • Join Us On Youtube
  • BMSG RSS Feed

get e-alerts in your inbox: