Making Munichs for Marketers: The Limits of “Consumer” Activism

Remember the much-ballyhooed tobacco lawsuits of the 1990s, the ones that were supposed to cripple Big Tobacco and then slowly starve it of new smokers?

Guess what?

1. Since the end of the publicity blitz surrounding the lawsuits, the U.S. teen smoking rate, the key to the industry’s future domestic profits, has stopped falling, and stayed steady at a substantially high level.

2. The U.S.-based tobacco corporations are about finished restructuring themselves to shield their extremely profitable global operations from U.S.-based penalties.

This is what happens when “consumer” activists do what they normally do, which is struggle mightily to summon the courage to offer their opponents what Neville Chamberlain offered Hitler. Afraid of connecting the dots between the three c-words — class, capitalism, and “consumers” — the aspiring anti-powers-that-be invariably fail to acknowledge that the weeds they are trying to pluck have roots. As a result, they invariably yield mere appeasements, rather than adequate, lasting changes.

Consider the similar case of “consumer” activists’ efforts to draw corporate food marketers to meet them in Munich about eroding childhood nutrition. A couple years back, the Center for Science in the Public Interest and the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood threatened to sue the Kellogg Company over its unyielding peddling of a wide variety of marketing-friendly (high flavor, low nutrition) foods to the increasingly obese U.S. population of children.

The threat extracted a settlement.

Q: How much better has this settlement proven to be than Chamberlain’s famous piece of paper?

A: None.

The document itself begins by permitting Kellogg to promulgate extreme falsehoods about itself:

“We remain first and foremost committed,” its opening paragraph reads, “to meeting our consumers’ changing needs.”

This massive lie begs two questions:

1. If “consumer” needs are king, why is it necessary for “watchdogs” to police Kellogg’s behavior?

2. If putting “our consumers'” (note the possessive formulation) needs ahead of Kellogg investors’ interests were ever actually adopted as actual company policy, how many minutes it would take Kellogg shareholders to eject their derelict board of directors?

In reality, as any glance at kids’ TV will confirm, all the settlement did was tweak Kellogg’s advertising strategies slightly. Most often, they simply tack on some unrealistic pep-talk about “getting outside” for 15 minutes, as if that will either work or compensate for their shameful promotion of junk foods.

One other effect of the Kellogg/CSPI/CCFC settlement has been voluntary adoption of similar marketing “guidelines” by other corporations.

The meaningfulness of such progress can be gleaned from one of the products that Kraft Foods’ Post Cereal division now sells as part of its “Sensible Solutions” program. Here you go, health food enthusiasts:

Part of a “balanced” society? Go ask Adolf…

Please Login to comment
1 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
1 Comment authors
Alex Recent comment authors

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Alex
Guest
Alex

There’s lots of people in this world who spend so much time watching their health that they haven’t the time to enjoy it . I reckon being ill as one of the great pleasures of life, provided one is not too ill and is not obliged to work till one is better.

Anynway nice post about 😀

“We’ve got a blog about nutrition, healthy eating, and health food
too. It includes summaries of articles in the news, lists healthy
recipes, offers tips and personal feedback on healthy eating, and
reports on nutritional research.”

check this out:
http://www.laurelonhealthfood.com