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.


suicide nets (1) Citizens United (1) Twitter for advocacy (1) childhood trauma (3) cancer research (1) Rachel Grana (1) community violence (1) Chile (1) elephant triggers (1) sugar-sweetened beverages (2) tobacco industry (2) collaboration (1) advocacy (3) Big Tobacco (3) junk food marketing to kids (2) authentic voices (1) community organizing (1) ssb (1) communication (2) built environment (2) Bill Cosby (1) Sam Kass (1) food (1) campaign finance (1) San Francisco (3) Colorado (1) sexual assault (1) corporate social responsibility (1) mental health (2) auto safety (1) paula deen (1) democracy (1) structural racism (1) obesity (10) diabetes prevention (1) beverage industry (2) Texas (1) Bloomberg (3) default frame (1) PepsiCo (1) physical activity (1) Marion Nestle (1) Berkeley (2) Merck (1) Twitter (1) environmental health (1) food and beverage marketing (3) inequities (1) marketing (1) sexism (2) cosmetics (1) prison system (1) childhood lead poisoning (1) childhood obesity (1) communication strategy (1) paper tigers (1) filibuster (1) Tea Party (1) soda industry (4) safety (1) sexual health (1) El Monte (3) suicide prevention (2) healthy eating (1) white house (1) Proposition 47 (1) seat belt laws (1) social justice (2) news (2) cancer prevention (1) community (1) front groups (1) cap the tap (1) media analysis (5) news analysis (3) online marketing (1) social change (1) choice (1) Let's Move (1) Telluride (1) george lakoff (1) racism (1) world water day (1) Oglala Sioux (3) journalism (1) food industry (4) violence prevention (8) Sandy Hook (2) Pine Ridge reservation (1) abortion (1) prevention (1) institutional accountability (1) social math (1) Richmond (5) Amanda Fallin (1) liana winett (1) McDonald's (1) Gardasil (1) personal responsibility (3) reproductive justice (1) tobacco tax (1) diabetes (1) health equity (10) SB 1000 (1) beauty products (1) Penn State (3) Michelle Obama (1) Campaign for Safe Cosmetics (1) indoor smoking ban (1) sports drinks (1) public health (69) values (1) nonprofit communications (1) food swamps (1) gender (1) food justice (1) ACEs (2) media advocacy (23) Food Marketing Workgroup (1) digital marketing (2) gatorade bolt game (1) nanny state (2) Newtown (1) junk food (2) media bites (1) American Beverage Association (1) community safety (1) tobacco control (2) cigarette advertising (1) Pine Ridge Indian Reservation (2) target marketing (8) soda tax (11) community health (1) sugary drinks (10) autism (1) messaging (3) social media (2) Jerry Sandusky (3) children's health (3) child sexual abuse (5) measure N (2) FCC (1) product safety (1) food environment (1) snap (1) regulation (2) gun control (2) soda taxes (2) news strategy (1) violence (2) public health policy (2) strategic communication (1) naacp (1) Joe Paterno (1) prison phone calls (1) equity (3) stigma (1) new year's resolutions (1) tobacco (5) privilege (1) food access (1) government intrusion (1) Dora the Explorer (1) Proposition 29 (1) news coverage (1) Whiteclay (4) industry appeals to choice (1) SSBs (1) vaccines (1) cervical cancer (1) political correctness (1) obesity prevention (1) genital warts (1) Nickelodeon (1) weight of the nation (1) youth (1) HPV vaccine (1) Big Soda (2) Aurora (1) food marketing (4) soda warning labels (1) Catholic church (1) Connecticut shooting (1) media (7) SB-5 (1) adverse childhood experiences (3) alcohol (5) gun violence (1) emergency contraception (1) chronic disease (2) framing (14) cannes lions festival (1) water security (1) breastfeeding (3) Golden Gate Bridge (2) news monitoring (1) california (1) SB 402 (1) personal responsibility rhetoric (1) Measure O (1) health care (1) sanitation (1) Oakland Unified School District (1) food deserts (1) Coca-Cola (3) women's health (2) election 2016 (1) language (6) Wendy Davis (1) childhood obestiy conference (1) Big Food (2) junk food marketing (4) sexual violence (2) race (1) Johnson & Johnson (1) Donald Trump (2) childhood adversity (1) Black Lives Matter (1) Community Coalition Against Beverage Taxes (1) suicide barrier (2) education (1) apha (2) water (1) sandusky (2) Happy Meals (1) summer camps (1) public health data (1) soda (12)
  • Follow Us On Facebook
  • Follow Us On Twitter
  • Join Us On Youtube
  • BMSG RSS Feed

get e-alerts in your inbox: