In reality, the advice offered by their literature is uninspiring at best and borderline unethical on the other. As Matt Fort, on his Fort on Food blog, points out, a thin veil is drawn over the government’s partners, but it doesn’t take long to spot the involvement of Bernard Matthews, Danone, Dole, Mars, McCains, Spar and Tesco. Indeed, the Food 4 Change website links directly to another website called www.mysupermarket.co.uk, which in turn delivers consumers directly to the online stores of Sainsbury’s, Asda, Tesco, Boots, Superdrug, Waitrose, Ocado, Virgin Wines and Majestic. Marvellous. Here’s Matt:
In other words, the Change 4 Life, both directly and indirectly, serves as a portal to, and therefore as a marketing arm of, major corporations. There is a tacit endorsement of what they sell and how they sell it, thus undermining the principles they’re supposed to be upholding. This seems at best bizarre, at worst cynical and corrupt.
This is not the first Government to have found easy accommodation with the supermarkets. Successive ministers have found it easier and more rewarding to guard the interests of large corporations than those of the electorate. Change 4 Life fits neatly into that pattern.
It would be entirely reasonable, I think, to expect much better from the government on this type of thing.
[edit: I still don't much like look of this campaign; but one of the comments below the line is well worth reading, and it makes a lot of sense. Here it is reproduced:
“Serious Bollocks” reads like many blogs; the author assumes that everyone has the same access to the Internet as them. Quote: “It’s almost impossible to believe that whoever designed and approved this actually lives in the digital age.” What about the 23% of UK households without Internet access who represent a significant proportion of the target demographic of this campaign? The website isn’t important – it’s just there to appease sponsors who pay for the leaflets.
Thanks for that useful comment, internet stranger.]