This was posted prior to my leaving for the White Mountains and I am, hopefully, having a good time. I have been a bit short of time by allowing myself to be drawn into a foolish discussion with an even more foolish person; so, my absentee postings will be a bit limited. I’d feel bad, but it is the weekend; so, enjoy the post and get outdoors and have some fun!

As you may or may not be aware, the Center for Science in the Public Interest has written a letter of demand to McDonald’s USA, Limited Liability Corporation demanding that McDonalds immediately cease using “toys” as part of their “Happy Meals” marketing strategy that is aimed directly to children. This is a copy of the “Demand Letter” taken directly from the CSPI website.

In the letter, CSPI alleges that McDonald’s leads the way in fast food advertisement directed at young children and that the industry spends as much as $350,000,000.00, and $520,000,000.00 total, using Federal Trade Commission figures.

The NPD group claims that fast food restaurants in 2006, sold more than 1.2 billion children’s meals with toy to children ages 12 and under. This allegedly represents 20% of all child traffic at those restaurants. This is the basis for the CSPI argument that forms their lawsuit threat against McDonalds.

The following is also taken directly from the CSPI website:

Mission Statement

The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) is a consumer advocacy organization whose twin missions are to conduct innovative research and advocacy programs in health and nutrition, and to provide consumers with current, useful information about their health and well-being.

In general, CSPI’s three main goals are:

• To provide useful, objective information to the public and policymakers and to conduct research on food, alcohol, health, the environment, and other issues related to science and technology;
• To represent the citizen’s interests before regulatory, judicial and legislative bodies on food, alcohol, health, the environment, and other issues; and
• To ensure that science and technology are used for the public good and to encourage scientists to engage in public-interest activities.

Let’s analyze the mission statement for a moment. I agree that it is helpful for consumers of products to know what they contain and what hazards may be encountered by their use. It is never bad to put out science and technology based information; unless, of course, that information is incorrect, suspect or hotly contended as is the case with global warming theory.

This next part strikes me as a bit overzealous and consistent with the bad neighbor situation whereby your next door neighbor tries to impose his view of uses for your private property in ways that best fit his vision of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and not your own; you the actual property owner. The tactics are bully based, backed up with the unjust application and abuse of regulatory, judicial and legislative influence on everyday decision making by adults on behalf of their children.

I have yet to see a child drive up to McDonalds, leap from his or her tricycle, place an order for a “Happy Meal” and reach for their wallets to make payment. Have you? I have seen 12 year olds ride their bicycles to McDonalds and purchase meals with money they received from their parents. These children have free choice to purchase food anywhere; so, what draws a 12 year old to McDonalds? Is it the happy meal? Could it be the very tasty Thick Shake, the taste difference in the French fries due to an oil use different from that of Burger King or Wendy’s? Why do they not choose Friendly’s or Fuddruckers? Fuddruckers provides consumers with “steak fries” that can be slathered over with liquid cheese and salted to one’s content. Friendly’s provided children with crayons and coloring books, just as many other chain and local restaurants do, (Applebee’s, the 99 chain, Stelio’s, etc.)

What is it that makes McDonald’s the target of this group? Could it be their iconic clown, Ronald McDonald, the Hamburglar, Grimace, Mayor McCheese,
Captain Crook, or Officer Big Mac. Or is it none of these? The CSPI is going after McDonalds, in my very humble opinion, and not any of the others because of McDonald’s success; not their toy or their characters. Anyone who’s had a child or a grand-child knows that a “Happy Meal” with or without a toy will still be preferred by young children over most other foods. Most children prefer the chicken nuggets because they are cut child size; they come with French fries as standard fare and a drink. Children, like adults, have discriminating palates, and McDonalds has a menu diverse enough and tasty enough to compete successfully with anyone.

Parents also have the option to choose apple dippers, low fat milk, chocolate milk or apple juice in place of a soda (diet soda is also available) or French fries, Parents can also choose salads, snack size fruit and walnut salad, chipotle snack, honey mustard wrap (crispy or grilled), ranch snack wrap (crispy or grilled), and a Mac Snack wrap. Parents can choose hamburgers over cheeseburgers and condiment free sandwiches over the norm, Chicken dip or no chicken dip. This doesn’t sound much different that the meals provided by public schools, except, these meals are tastier AND they include a FREE toy.

The toy isn’t the main reason children order “Happy Meals”. The parents can always purchase the toy separately and order any other meal of their choosing. Kids choose “Happy Meals” because they are “Happy”, unlike those who are members of the anti-liberty group, Center for Science in the Public Interest. This is just one of many groups of collectivists who seek to impose their beliefs on everyone else whom they can’t convince to change through debate. With the CSPI, there is no debate; there is no free will or freedom of choice and children aren’t the true concern. The true concern is power and the legal authority and sanction to exercise their rights with total disregard for those of others.

If this group is concerned about children, it seems to me that they could advocate for the removal of children from drug or alcohol addled parents. They could advocate for life sentences for child abusers and for anyone who would rape or otherwise defile the most valuable property of all – one’s own body. Instead, the CSPI is trying to make a connection between the tobacco icon, Joe the Camel and Ronald McDonald, not because they have anything in common, but because they can be used by the CSPI to point out that advertising a product and success is evil by making it all about cartoon images and children.

This ploy won’t work, however, for many reasons. Let’s just go to the most obvious; cigarettes are not supposed to be sold to children under 18. There are no such restrictions on hamburgers, chicken nuggets or free toys. Cigarette resellers didn’t provide little gymnasiums or tubes to their product users; while, McDonalds often does provide physical activity devices to kids to help burn off many of the calories consumed as it promotes exercise, and a balance to parental nutritional choice. My grand-daughter is 5 years old and weighs 36 pounds. She and I often go to McDonalds because she likes their apple scoopers and the play area. She gets worn out in the tubes and on other apparatus, while I get a few chapters read on either my Nook or my Kindle readers. The only thing she loves more is going to Chucky Cheese where she climbs and runs wild on a diet of pizza, sprite and french fries with ranch dressing (a taste she’s aquired from my bride and her Nana). I wonder how she’d feel if she saw Chucky and his Band behind bars because they were determined responsible for the misbehavior and bad choices of their patrons?

It may just be me, but I think we are past the point where these kooks need to be treated as kooks. I for one plan on telling them to get lost and if they get in my face, to give them a gentle kick in the ass and a pat on the back to encourage them to go home and concentrate on their own business and less on interfering with the rights of their neighbors.