McDonald's New Happy Meals: A step in the right direction?

A	Yes, it's great that McDonald's is offering healthier choices.

B	Maybe. The change represents baby steps, but baby steps might lead to longer strides in the right direction.

C	No. It's not nearly enough to make a difference, and McDonald's isn't actually committed to making a difference.

McDonald's recently announced that they will offer "improved nutrition choices" in their Happy Meals. The fries have been reduced by one ounce, and a quarter cup of apple slices come with every meal. Fat-free chocolate or 1% plain milk are available instead of soda, which is the default. A toy still comes with the meal, unless you're in San Francisco, where toys in fast-food meals have been banned unless certain nutritional requirements are met. New York City is considering a similar law.

While some commentary on this announcement has claimed that McDonald's bowed to pressure from food activists, in reality a huge corporation like McDonald's will only change their model if it helps the bottom line.

This slight change to Happy Meals might appease some parents, or give the company a positive image boost, or deter other cities from following San Francisco's examples by sending the message, "We're trying!" Journalists' reactions to this news has varied -- some are excited, some are skeptical, and everyone is trying to figure out if this relatively minor change is a step in the right direction.

The SF Gate decides it isn't: " Aren't baby steps like these in the right direction and, therefore, deserving of support? I don't think so. McDonald's proposed changes are a reason to ask a different question: Is a better-for-you Happy Meal a good choice? Wouldn't your child be better off eating something healthy, not just slightly healthier?"

Over at Grist, slight progress gets a slightly better rap: "we should acknowledge these positive changes, even if we feel they are inadequate....let's keep up the pressure on McDonald's by continuing to highlight the shortcomings of the Happy Meal."

The Huffington Post sees the whole thing as a extension of McDonald's normal gameplan, to create the perception of wholesome food while selling us hormone- and additive-addled calorie bombs. "While McDonald's is making these changes and the result may be positive for the health of our kids...In the end, McDonald's is what it is: A fast food restaurant peddling fat, sugar and salt-laden foods designed to addict you to it, so you become a customer for life."

At the Atlantic, two journalists offer two different opinions, one championing the change to Happy Meals ("While we may not recognize it yet, we have just witnessed a milestone in the War on Obesity...McDonald's and Walmart have raised the bar for what food companies can do to address public concerns about nutrition and obesity") the other deriding the change ("These may be steps in the right direction, but I'd call them tiny baby steps...If McDonald's were serious, it could offer a truly healthier Happy Meal as the default and back it up with marketing dollars...I'm not impressed.")

These responses certainly run the gamut of possible reactions to McDonald's announcement. What do you think? Are the changes to the the Happy Meal a step in the right direction?

Eleanor Brown

McDonald's New Happy Meals: A step in the right direction?

More public opinion polls: