Big Macs and the Beano: Is it time for the comic to drop the junk food brands?
BMJ 2023; 380 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.p197 (Published 01 February 2023) Cite this as: BMJ 2023;380:p197The Beano website describes itself as “100% safe for children”—but is its junk food related content doing more harm than good? Claire Mulrenan, Mark Petticrew, and Harry Wallop investigate
All rapid responses
Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed. Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles. The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not including references and author details. We will no longer post responses that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
Dear Editor
The characters typically seen in the Beano are quite unlike those in the comics (Eagle, Rover, my sisters' Bunty) I saw as a child, and this accorded with my middle class upbringing, rather than a deliberate choice to avoid obese anarchist schoolchildren as folk heroes. The fact that the Beano has seen off almost every other comic in the past sixty-five years shows that the publishers know the demography of their readership extremely well. D C Thomson is a commercial organisation whose work is the publication of various magazines for the entertainment of their customers, and not a subsidiary of Health Education Scotland. That their online quizzes rest heavily on burgers, pizzas and other "HFSS" is unsurprising, since these are familiar to, and popular with, the comic's readers. Few of them would do well at a quiz about courgettes, kale and soya milk, but Mars Bars and Hula Hoops are things they get as treats at break time.
It is not the fault of the Beano that children are obese, but more that so many of their readership fall into this category, due to the pressures of poor education, low income and actual paid-for advertising by the food industry. No-one would suggest removing murders from detective stories, replacing them with minor misdemeanours, would reduce violence in society.
Whilst it might be a wonderful thing for the Beano to become a clarion call in healthy eating, no matter the effect on comic sales, it is perhaps an unrealistic expectation. The readers will find it less appealing than the low fat, sugar free 'energy bars' which entirely fail to supersede a Mars Bar or Big Mac. We cannot expect health education to be driven by comic writers' altruism, when Government fails to act.
Competing interests: No competing interests
Dear Editor
The uniqueness of the Beano is that the characters are not only rebellious, and play pranks against each other, but they also challenge aspects of society that impact on their freedom which is perceived as being authoritative and restrictive; adults are generally illustrated as being over-bearing, self-righteous, and also flawed. Teachers, policemen, politicians, Hitler, royalty, and celebrities have all been subjected to the humour and unfettered opinion and actions of characters such as Dennis the Menace and The Bash Street Kids. For child readers, and many of their parents, the appeal of the comic is their admiration for the characters, who despite being aware of the possible consequences, continue to rebel each week finding new, creative ways to challenge the status quo.
It can be assumed that The Bash Street Kids response to the “BMJ investigation” would be to adopt their usual disregard for adults who attempt to impose their perceptions and beliefs on children especially if they are viewed as being light on logic. The difficulty that the BMJ has is that junk foods are not banned substances and remain widely available in shops, cafés, and take-aways. Children recognise this and also note that even people in smart suits and posh cars enjoy burgers. The obvious logic from children is - if junk food is not good for child or adult health, why is it available? The answer is that in the adult world nobody is willing to make a decision and it is easier for experts to pass the responsibility on to parents, their children, and in this discussion Beano script writers. The response of the Beano to this behaviour will continue to be satirical, using exaggeration, irony, humour and ridicule to criticise and expose the perceived flaws in human nature.
It may be that the food and obesity experts who criticised the Beano should eat humble pie and collaborate with the Beano writers and artists to see if they can deliver a message on junk food that will attract the inevitable humour and ridicule but will also culminate in acceptance by the rebellious Beano characters and their many readers.
Competing interests: I have spent 30 years as a paediatrician in Dundee, which is where the Beano and the famous characters were created.
Dear Editor,
I was sorry to read that the Beano has been using my data and that of other children to support advertising campaigns for unhealthy foods. As a child, it is hard to avoid being lured into the belief that ultra processed foods are necessary, normal and nutritious. From Peppa Pig to Snap, Crackle and Pop, we are surrounded by images that entice us children to consume foods which rot our teeth and increase our weight. Where can we turn to? Whom can we trust? Beano is a trusted brand which has many good features - for example, inclusion of minority figures, characters with physical disabilities and great jokes. In view of the problems uncovered by BMJ, I would like to make the following suggestions to prevent harms associated with inadvertent promotion of unhealthy food at the Beano:
1. Actively promote healthy foods such as vegetables on the website and in the comic, making them sound exciting and fun
2. Delete some of the games on the website which glorify unhealthy food and/or suggest that healthy foods are disgusting
3. Reduce incentives on the website for children to spend excessive time on screens - for example, the website could time out after 1 hour to prevent children from spending more than 1 hour on the site in a single session
4. Stop using random questions to harvest information about children's preferences and sell them to companies
5. Introduce a new policy about which companies the Beano will work with, avoiding companies which harm children in their adverts or in what they sell
As you can see, the main problem is the website rather than the magazine, however it would be good if the magazine could also promote healthy eating.
Yours sincerely,
Maria Boyle
Year 6 student, London
Competing interests: No competing interests
Re: Big Macs and the Beano: Is it time for the comic to drop the junk food brands?
Dear Editor,
It was great to see so much engagement with our recently published article ‘Big Macs and the Beano: Is it time for the comic to drop the junk food brands?’, both in the media and in letters from your readership. We thought it was worth responding to a few arguments that were made to clarify any potential misunderstandings.
Firstly, a response to Gerald T Freshwater’s assertion that the Beano knows the ‘demography of their readership extremely well’ and that a reliance on HFSS foods in quiz content is simply good business sense. He implies that, unlike their middle-class counterparts, few of the Beano readership would do well at a quiz about ‘courgettes, kale and soya milk’.
Freshwater rightly notes the economic inequalities that exist in obesity rates among children; according to the most recent NCMP data children living in the most deprived areas are twice as likely to be living with obesity than in the least deprived. The reasons for these trends are complex, but such inequalities are perpetuated by commercial forces that shape the environment in which food ‘choices’ are made. For example, we know that ultra-processed food is cheaper per calorie than healthier equivalents; and studies have shown that exposure to advertising and availability of these products is far greater for children living in deprived areas.
While we agree that it is not the fault of the Beano that children are obese, what we argue in our piece is that, for a website that claims to be a ‘safe space’ for children, they must do better. If, as they claim, the health and wellbeing of their readership is a priority for them, surely they should try to challenge and subvert these commercial forces in line with their ‘anarchist’ stance, rather than simply re-entrenching and reproducing such inequalities?
While Stewart Forsyth’s suggestion to collaborate with the Beano in such endeavours may seem a reasonable one, the company’s response to our publication suggests otherwise. Rather than the Beano committing to the removal of harmful content from their website, the company responded aggressively, including targeting our quoted experts in an apparent attempt to get them to change their statements. For a treasured UK institution we had hoped for better.
Finally, in response to Maria Boyle’s letter, thank you for writing in - it is heartening to see the next generation of public health campaigners and advocates coming through. We hope that much needed government regulation to protect you and your peers from harmful commercial interests is imminent. In the meantime let’s hope we see a Beano U-turn and a public commitment to your excellent 5 step plan. Keep up the good fight!
Claire Mulrenan and Mark Petticrew
Competing interests: No competing interests