“The Extraordinary Science of Addictive Junk Food” by Michael Moss addresses many issues with big companies and their thought process. Although Moss neglects to show the things that companies do right or do because the consumer desires it. He doesn’t bring to light the different options that big companies put out that are healthier for the consumer. Moss does a good job of pointing out what he believes to be the short coming of big companies towards their consumers. Are big food companies meeting our needs or creating them for us? Should they have to set limits between meeting our genuine needs and making a profit for themselves? Moss’s point of view of the conscious effort to make food inexpensive and addictive is an accurate portrayal. …show more content…
Moss spent time interviewing scientists, executives, and former CEO’s to get a clearer picture of how these companies do this. Moss explains that when a product is failing to sell, companies opt to make packaging and logos brighter or more appealing to consumers; instead of pulling the product off the shelves. Moss also touches the fact that additives, like sugar and preservatives, are put into junk food that will enhance a consumer’s craving enough that they will go and purchase it more. Moss states companies like General Mills believe, why change something that taste good and that are selling, even if they are not the healthiest food for consumers. Michael Moss also discusses about an interview that he had with a former employee of Coca-Cola, Jeffery Dunn. The interview was in regards to introducing a low cost bottle of cola in Brazil. While on this mission for Coca-Cola Dunn realized that a bigger need was for healthier food and water. At this realization, Dunn decided that issues surrounding addictive foods needed to be addressed. Dunn’s attempt to change Coca-Cola’s mind was unsuccessful and he was left unemployed. Dunn is now paying back his karmic debt by selling baby carrots that are washed and packaged without any added
Journalist, David H. Freedman, and author of How Junk Food Can End Obesity, dedicates an article to address the situation regarding the wholesome food movement. In his writings, he points out that although this new phenomenon brags about healthier foods being made available, there are some faulty aspects within the cause. Many loyal fast-food customers are put off by the anouncement of healthier menu items, while health fanatics are raving about restaurants catering to their needs. There are two types of consumers in the world of food; both of which are blind to the opposing sides’ work ethics.
There should be limit’s that stop’s food companies from promoting themselves as appealing when in reality their food products are a hazard to our bodies. As Barboza states in his article “There is a need to set specific standards on what is marketed to children…” we are in agreement that, what ever kids see on T.V. or being marketed, they want it! As a child I remember that I wanted many things I saw on T.V. like Carl's Jr, Lucky Charms, Mcdonald's, Gushers, ect… When eating these food products, as you get older it affects your health. A good
Throughout the film, various companies are exposed for promoting products in a manner that depicts the products as a healthy alternative. The ultimate exposing is done on the government and the USDA. The government is exposed for making deals with food companies to not demonize companies that sell unhealthy food. Even Michelle Obama 's "Let 's Move" campaign against childhood obesity started out bringing unhealthy companies to the light but died down by emphasizing exercise and not talking about food.This is largely in part due to a deal made with major corporations who weren’t too pleased with the original approach of “Let’s Move”. In addition, the USDA is exposed for promoting products such as cheese, milk, and high fructose corn syrup in a fictional way. They provided no information that they were unhealthy in the
The 2009 movie Food Inc. describes the major role that food production plays within many lives. This movie revealed that there is a very small variety of companies that consumers purchase their food from. These few companies actually control what is out on the shelves and what we put into our bodies. These companies have changed food production into a food production business. Many of these companies experiment with ways to create large quantities of food at low production costs to result in an enormous amount of profit for themselves. Some of the production cost cuts also result in less healthy food for the population. Instead of worrying about the health of the population, the companies are worried about what will make them the most money.
The community involvement began when democracy first developed in the early 7th century and furthered by Solon, who began reforming the Athenian justice system and organizing citizens by economic class. (10) Pericles pushed the envelope even further with the radical democracy of the Greek Golden Age, which emphasized direct democracy of the people by voting and selecting jurors to court cases randomly, giving more power to the poor classes and upsetting the elite. (11) However, with more freedom, came more responsibility. As Pericles himself said in his address to the Athenian people, "if a man takes no interest in public affairs, we alone do not commend him as quiet; but condemn him as useless." (12) To the Athenian people, participation in politics and law was not only important, but vital to government run by the people. Pericles even expounded on this by saying "action does not suffer from discussion but, rather, from the want of that instruction," (13) and "we have an exceptional gift of acting after calculating the prospects... whereas other men are bold from ignorance but hesitate upon reflection." (14) Athens was strong because the citizens needed to participate in their government and, in turn, needed to think critically about the decisions they made with each of their
Athenian democracy includes participation of all adult, free, male, citizen, made possible for all. If at the beginning and during the thriving period of the Athens democracy the occupations of a state position was considered to be an worthy duty for the citizens, the taking in of ...
In Michael Moss’ “The Extraordinary Science of Addictive Junk Food” he argues that companies have a huge influence on what consumers purchase and have been successfully able to get people addicted to junk foods because one’s willpower does not overpower their lack of adequate information and time, vulnerability to manipulative marketing and formulation of products, and their socioeconomic status.
Yet I do agree with him that the companies marketing strategies should change. The junk food industry is targeting certain people to buy their products. For example, Moss spoke to Bob Drane inventor of the Lunchables on how they started adding sugar to the packaging by including Kool-Aid, cookies and other extras when customers started to get bored with the plain packages. Moreover, they started targeting younger kids. When the company shift focus to the kids the ads started showing up in the Sunday morning cartoons which announced: “All day, you gotta do what they say, but lunchtime is all yours.” ()In their ads they generate a feeling of empowerment to kids who now want to eat Lunchables as an act of independence. They don’t make it about what is inside, but they form it into a psychological aspect. Another example would be, when Coca-Cola started marketing to places that are poverty-stricken in Brazil by making the bottles smaller and more affordable so they would buy them. However, Coca-Cola isn’t the only one targeting Brazil, Nestle also started sending a massive amount of women to roam the poor neighborhoods to sell American- style processed foods door-to-door. When Dunn saw this he felt remorse and tried to push the company to a more positive road by stopping the marketing of Coke to schools, but shortly after he was fired due to the backlash the company received. The companies should market their products to groups that are less
Minogue argues that, and for great reason. The Romans were the first to introduce splitting power into more groups. This was an effective way to fight off the despotism of tyrants and to make sure one did not hold much power over an entire empire. While the Roman Empire was ruled over by a Kings in its early days, after the last one met an unfortunate end the power of absolute monarch was abolished. Kings were seen as demanding of servitude, far from how the rulers wanted the empire to be for its people. In its place, two Consuls held the highest position over the Empire. This is an equivalent to a president that we have in modern America. The Roman senate helped split power as well. The senate advised the Consuls on their actions and what they were doing with the Empire. Tension and stand offs happened when these two parties disagreed. Much like in America when one branch disagrees with each other or does not want to let the other party gain much power. Another influence America took from the Romans was giving the typical person a way to represent themselves. When the plebeians of the empire demanded a fair say they protested against how the patricians treated them and equated it with them having too much power. After that successful protest, they were
He begins his argument by commenting about kids suing McDonald’s for “making them fat” (Zinczenko 462). Zinczenko ponders the absurdity of this claim considering how food choices are based on personal responsibility. However, he then considers the overwhelming availability ratio of fast food to fresh food while sympathizing he was once obese himself (Zinczenko 462). Zinczenko uses the primary argument that fast food companies are deceiving consumers with misleading advertisement, hidden nutrition facts, and calorie risks. He believes companies are encouraging the public to eat their unhealthy foods by omitting alarming information and levying “good” deals. In consequence, fast food companies are increasing the chances of obesity and diabetes in consumers by stimulating poor eating
Athens was one of the key cities at the time of Ancient Greece. Some might argue that Athens was a great democracy but I respectfully disagree. I believe that Athens was not truly a democracy because of the citizen obligations, voting rights, the standards that it was an oligarchy, and the system to vote people out of the assembly. According to the Athenian Constitution written by a Greek philosopher named Aristotle it states, “ If the courts decides that he has no right to be enrolled as a citizen, he is sold by Athens as a slave.” This process is not very fair because if the person applying to be a citizen does not follow a few guidelines he will not be chosen as a citizen. Some might argue that this process was just but there are many more downfalls to this than one might
The word “democracy” or “demoskratos” in Greek, is a form of government where the (ruling) power is in the hands of the people. The democracy of Athens developed around 500 B.C.E because of the current uproar of oligarchies and dictatorship. The main body of governance in the democracy was the Citizens Assembly, which was a meeting where any man regardless of class was able to direct foreign policies, balance the power of leaders, and was able to oversee laws. Athens had both anti-democratic and democratic qualities to its government because they only represented certain individuals out of a whole population, however this was the first time in history where citizens of any class could vote on governmental affairs and average citizens were able to have the power to check and balance their leaders power.
The Athenian government was a democracy because the people had a freedom to be able to do what they want as long as it’s under the law. And this freedom was for all people. In his article “Pericles' funeral oration” Thucydides states that Athenians gave equal justice to all. Advancement in public life falls to one’s reputation for good work. Social class is not allowed to interfere with someone's merit. This shows that it doesn’t matter if you are rich or poor, big or small, legend or beginner everybody gets the same equal rights as others.
To begin, due to federal regulations, Big Food cannot claim their products prevent or cure any disease in advertisements. Instead, Big Food advertises their products as contributors to increased health and wellness. These claims are legal to advertise as long as they are supported by science or data. This combination of science and marketing redefined the notion of healthy food to change consumers’ and the governmental perceptions of certain products. The results of the increase of “health-promoting foods” is billion of dollars in profit for Big Food and multiple generation of confused consumers. In order to understand how Big Food reaps the benefits of these “health-promoting foods,” one must first understand how they obtain positive judgements about their products health benefits.
In this hectic world, people look for ways to save most of their time. They do not even have time to prepare a good and healthy meal for themselves. That's when the food companies come to their rescue with their low nutritional products. These are readily available packaged snacks with high sugar or salt content with little to no proteins, vitamins and minerals. Billions of dollars are spent each year for marketing these silent killer foods to people who are looking for alternative convenient snacks. "The Extraordinary Science of Addictive Junk Food" written by Michael Moss tells us about the reasons behind the popularity and addiction of junk foods. People are being manipulated into buying junk foods and fast foods which boosts their addiction.