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.


Proposition 47 (1) Golden Gate Bridge (2) SB 402 (1) food deserts (1) alcohol (5) genital warts (1) McDonald's (1) Johnson & Johnson (1) government intrusion (1) food and beverage marketing (3) beverage industry (2) collaboration (1) childhood adversity (1) Big Tobacco (3) community (1) health equity (10) Food Marketing Workgroup (1) white house (1) language (6) news analysis (3) food environment (1) public health policy (2) Whiteclay (4) Wendy Davis (1) safety (1) Jerry Sandusky (3) Nickelodeon (1) HPV vaccine (1) naacp (1) liana winett (1) water security (1) Twitter (1) Measure O (1) gatorade bolt game (1) violence (2) Community Coalition Against Beverage Taxes (1) tobacco (5) ACEs (2) children's health (3) regulation (2) emergency contraception (1) SB 1000 (1) Oglala Sioux (3) women's health (2) nanny state (2) marketing (1) social math (1) Newtown (1) suicide nets (1) Merck (1) child sexual abuse (5) El Monte (3) autism (1) social justice (2) Connecticut shooting (1) strategic communication (1) apha (3) junk food marketing (4) community health (1) personal responsibility rhetoric (1) suicide barrier (2) mental health (2) snap (1) advocacy (3) Marion Nestle (1) sugary drinks (10) cigarette advertising (1) communication (2) Michelle Obama (1) PepsiCo (1) environmental health (1) public health data (1) indoor smoking ban (1) Happy Meals (1) chronic disease (2) Telluride (1) food access (1) summer camps (1) values (1) Catholic church (1) target marketing (9) tobacco industry (2) george lakoff (1) obesity prevention (1) Rachel Grana (1) food marketing (5) media advocacy (23) paper tigers (1) Oakland Unified School District (1) soda industry (4) health care (1) Colorado (1) gun violence (1) Berkeley (2) childhood obestiy conference (1) diabetes (1) SB-5 (1) gun control (2) equity (3) sexual violence (2) food industry (4) junk food marketing to kids (2) tobacco tax (1) childhood lead poisoning (1) Dora the Explorer (1) violence prevention (8) measure N (2) reproductive justice (1) SSBs (1) public health (71) journalism (1) Richmond (5) education (1) sandusky (2) cancer prevention (1) sports drinks (1) framing (14) choice (1) nonprofit communications (1) Campaign for Safe Cosmetics (1) race (1) cap the tap (1) democracy (1) election 2016 (1) childhood trauma (3) soda taxes (2) cosmetics (1) tobacco control (2) healthy eating (1) Bill Cosby (1) Proposition 29 (1) cervical cancer (1) vaccines (1) racism (1) personal responsibility (3) inequities (1) community safety (1) Texas (1) Citizens United (1) built environment (2) authentic voices (1) beauty products (1) paula deen (1) obesity (10) Big Food (2) california (1) world water day (1) Chile (1) junk food (2) abortion (1) ssb (1) institutional accountability (1) gender (1) Sam Kass (1) food (1) social media (2) water (1) Black Lives Matter (1) news (2) Donald Trump (2) media analysis (6) media bites (1) auto safety (1) sexism (2) Sandy Hook (2) soda (12) communication strategy (1) stigma (1) cancer research (1) adverse childhood experiences (3) seat belt laws (1) weight of the nation (1) cannes lions festival (1) sexual assault (1) privilege (1) Twitter for advocacy (1) Aurora (1) default frame (1) campaign finance (1) messaging (3) American Beverage Association (1) physical activity (1) San Francisco (3) childhood obesity (1) social change (1) filibuster (1) elephant triggers (1) Pine Ridge reservation (1) diabetes prevention (1) front groups (1) soda tax (11) political correctness (1) new year's resolutions (1) Big Soda (2) news coverage (1) Let's Move (1) Bloomberg (3) food justice (1) corporate social responsibility (1) prevention (1) Pine Ridge Indian Reservation (2) youth (1) sugar-sweetened beverages (2) Gardasil (1) industry appeals to choice (1) product safety (1) digital marketing (3) food swamps (1) sanitation (1) news monitoring (1) prison system (1) suicide prevention (2) soda warning labels (1) structural racism (1) community violence (1) Tea Party (1) Joe Paterno (1) Coca-Cola (3) Penn State (3) sexual health (1) online marketing (1) community organizing (1) breastfeeding (3) news strategy (1) prison phone calls (1) media (7) FCC (1) Amanda Fallin (1)
  • Follow Us On Facebook
  • Follow Us On Twitter
  • Join Us On Youtube
  • BMSG RSS Feed

get e-alerts in your inbox: