The magazine is now filled with ads for these and other unhealthy food products. In too many cases, the line between ad and editorial content is blurred. The May issue came wrapped in a cover which is, in effect, an ad for Arby’s “Adventure Meals.” Rather than promoting stories inside the magazine that help kids explore the world, the ad over urges kids “to look inside and start your adventure at Arby’s today” — which includes indulging in its 590- calorie “chicken finger” meal….But no magazine that appeals to kids should even remotely threaten their health. Eliminating ads like those in National Geographic Kids won’t make childhood obesity disappear. But ads that entice them to eat nutritionally questionable food is contributing to the problem. Of all institutions, National Geographic should know better.
Does this mean the SF Chronicle opposes the portion of Adventure Meal sales that has raised $1.3 million for “the support and nurturing of families in need and their children”? Does this mean the SF Chronicle will stop running advertising from Arby’s, M&Ms, etc.? For the record, the rexblog thinks the San Francisco Chronicle should try cutting back on its diet of flabby editorials.