A nutrition group is threatening to sue McDonald's if the fast food chain does not remove its toys from its Happy Meals. The group says that McDonald's is effectively "luring" children to eat unhealthy with these toys, and is using deceptive marketing.
This lawsuit is completely and utterly ridiculous. It is ultimately in the hands of the parents whether their children should be allowed to eat these Happy Meals. Happy Meals are aimed at young children. I don't think a three and a half foot tall boy of the age of 6 would be able to get to McDonald's by himself and buy the meal. No, no, no. The responsibility rests with the parents. If parents are idiotic enough to drive their 6 year old son to McDonald's twice a week because little Bobby is begging for one of those toys, then good riddance.
And actually, McDonald's has taken steps to make its foods more healthy with a variety of menu options for kids. McDonald's has given kids milk with Happy Meals for quite a while. Recently the chain introduced the option of "apple dippers", a move in the healthy direction.
Nevertheless, McDonald's is in no way responsible for the varying (unhealthy) eating habits of children. Simply put, the fast food chain is a business, and a genius one at that. They put those toys out there to attract children. But the children aren't the one deciding whether they can go to McDonald's, are they?
That is all.
7 comments:
I just love how we can assume that parents who take their children to McDonald's are automatically considered "idiotic" and should be told "good riddance". Besides this slight(really?) glitch in opinion, I must say that the toys included in Happy Meals do act as a major incentive for children to want a Happy Meal, and although I wouldn't say that Apple Dippers (which contain 100 calories for a few apple slices, whereas 1kg of apples contains 127 calories thus meaning that the apple slices from McDonald's are loaded with extra carbs/calories in addition to the numerous preservatives on the slices)are a step forward to McDonald's having a more healthy selection of food, I would say that McDonald's is a business which is trying to increase its profits and so if people are pulled in by their schemes then so be it.
I agree, it is the responsibility of the parent to make the choices regarding the food that these young children consume. While the toy might make the meal more enjoyable for the child, the parent is the one who ultimately decides to get the meal. Mcdonald's restaurants should not be restricted from offering these toys that help them compete against other chains, such as Wendys or Burger King, just because they attract the customers they are aiming for.
I think that parents are definitely responsible for what their children consume and how healthily they eat. I was sadly one of those kids who only ordered a Happy Meal just for the toy it came with, so I think that McDonald's is really smart that way by attracting younger kids to eat their food. By attracting younger kids, they are actually building a bigger base of costumers for the future. These young kids will eventually become adults who may actually continue eating McDonald's and might end up feeding their children Happy Meals as well. Of course McDonald's would want to "lure" children into eating their food...that's how they make money and keep their business wealthy. With that, these toys just seem to be a way for McDonald's to keep their business profiting. Parents are ultimately the people responsible for what their kids eat.
Although I believe that parents do have responsibility over what their kids eat, when kids get upset and start making a scene, it's really probable that an adult will give in to their children and buy unhealthy food like McDonalds so that their children calm down. But I think the way to deal with this isn't suing fast-food companies; I think that teaching kids early on about the problems with fast-food will help kids make better choices. Instead of suing the companies, the nutrition group should make programs that help get information out to kids on why the toy isn't worth it, just like the lesson about not talking to strangers.
I agree that this is somewhat of a ridiculous lawsuit because it is simply a marketing technique. It is in no way false advertising because McDonald's is not claiming it is a healthy meal, but simply encouraging kids with a toy. Also, I do not think that this has a huge effect on the number of children eating at McDonalds. When deciding where to eat, I doubt that kids choose to eat at McDonalds purely because they want a toy.
In addition, it is completely in the parents control. They can decide where to take their kids and what they eat. If the parents do not want their kids to eat unhealthy foods, then they should just not take their kids to McDonalds in the first place. Also, it is not like the toy is encouraging a more unhealthy option at McDonalds. As far as I am concerned, it is all pretty unhealthy and the kids meal is no worse than all of the other options.
Even though I agree that the parents are the ones who ultimately make the decision, I think that kids do influence their parents. I think there has to be some point in all this marketing to kids because we see it all the time. At the grocery store, the sugary and most unhealthy cereals are always at eye level and are never on the very top shelf or the very bottom, where kids will not see them. No, sugary cereals are at eye level, with bright colors, cartoon characters, and sometimes even prizes inside. We also see it on the boxes of sugary snacks, which also have cartoon characters, bright colors, and the occasional game on the side of the box, all to market towards children. Like I said, we see this all the time.
Yale University’s Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity recently did a study on the specific example of cereal and found that "The least healthy breakfast cereals are those most frequently and aggressively marketed directly to children as young as age two" (according to http://opa.yale.edu/news/article.aspx?id=7013). And these kids don't just get marketed to when they visit the grocery store. Oh no, "The average preschooler sees 642 cereal ads per year on television alone, almost all for cereals with the worst nutrition rankings" (according to http://opa.yale.edu/news/article.aspx?id=7013).
So while it may not seem like it makes much sense to market to two, three, or even eleven year olds like McDonalds is doing, they grow up thinking that this kind of thing is okay. And not to mention the fact that they pester their parents to buy them these products, so the products do get bought, somehow.
I think the lawsuit seems slightly crazy and unnecessary, yet I think that more should be done to stop this kind of thing in general. Kids should associate their favorite cartoon characters with adventure/ education/ anything except an unhealthy lifestyle.
-Alice Bebbington
I agree that the parents have to be the ones to make decisions for their kids because kids would most likely not make the right choice when it comes down to making decisions. However, I don't think that McDonald's is moving towards a healthier path when it comes to selling their products because if they were, they would be making cautious and smart choices to change their menus since everything on them is super unhealthy. They're just saying that they're moving towards a healthier path, but all they are doing is trying to attract customers with new toys in Happy Meals and substitutes for their greasy foods.
I think the lawsuit is ridiculous!! If we want to make a change in society by eating and becoming healthier, then we should stop going to fast food places such as McDonald's that only provide us with calories and fats in every bite. If we want to make a change in society, then we have to take action and start to think reasonably and smart once and for all!!
Post a Comment