Donations for Feeding America and other food charities have been relentlessly pushed by certain political and social influencing organizations during the pandemic. When so many groups push for a single charity, then maybe it's time to start peeling the onion back. This article is from 2014, but it gives insight to some of the appeals that we are seeing for donations to food charities.
https://nypost.com/2014/09/28/feeding-america-public-service-lies/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But most of all, the ads inform us of a horror we’d otherwise think impossible: America has so failed its children that 17 million — one in five — don’t have enough to eat.
Except that, enjoyable as all this self-loathing might seem, it’s simply a fairy tale.
America’s children aren’t starving, not even slightly — not by any measure, survey or study.
If anything, too many kids are eating too much of the wrong stuff. Which is why the nation’s first lady is leading an anti-obesity campaign.
The only basis for Feeding America’s claim comes from US Department of Agriculture surveys in which heads of households were asked if at any time during a calendar year their children were a) unable to eat what they wanted; b) unable to eat in whatever quantity they wanted; c) forced to eat cheaper brands, or d) afraid their food supply might run out on any single day.
Fully 85.5 percent said “no”; just 14.5 percent replied “yes.”
The Agriculture Department tendentiously labels the latter group “food insecure.” And it is from this number, and this number alone, that Feeding America gets its nonsensical claim that one in five kids is fighting starvation daily.
The truth is far different; this is an issue that’s been studied for decades.
Look at Census polling that asks heads of households if any member of the family missed even a single meal, on one day a year, because of a lack of resources: Only 0.01 percent said “yes” — one out of 1,000.
This is what US taxpayers should expect: We spend almost $1 trillion a year on state and federal safety-net programs for the 46 million people defined as living in poverty ($21,000 per individual, nearly $87,000 per family of four).
But what harm is it if “Feeding America” exaggerates in order to get nutritious food to poor kids who do fall through the cracks?
Well, the motive here isn’t remotely altruistic. Forbes magazine lists Feeding America as the fourth-largest nonprofit in America.
And, as Paul Roderick Gregory notes in a Forbes column, the group’s “CEO earns over a half million dollars.
Its corporate sponsors represent America’s largest agribusiness companies, food processors and retailers (Conagra, Food Lion, General Mills, Kelloggs, Kroger, Pepsico and Walmart).”
If you make or sell food, you want to inculcate brand loyalty at the youngest age possible. And to get the public thinking we’re still not spending enough on food — never mind that 35 percent of poor kids are obese.
But the damage from the Feeding America campaign is far more insidious. Above all else, it promotes the perception that our free-market system — which, lest we forget, enables America to be the most generous and socially conscious country in history — has barely progressed beyond the sweat-shop era.
In other words, the campaign doesn’t just serve the interests of Big (Agri)Business, it boosts Big Government.
“Propaganda skillfully employed will convince people living in paradise they are living in hell, and people living in hell they are living in paradise”: That’s how Adolf Hitler once put it.
The Feeding America spots are distributed via the Ad Council, the nonprofit public-service-announcement broker that for 70 years has been addressing us as dimwitted 10-year-olds, forever warning of looming menace on our perilous journey from erection to resurrection.
Not coincidentally, the US Department of Agriculture is a major Ad Council client.
By feeding the false perception of rampant child hunger, the Ad Council is aiding and abetting the eternal bureaucratic demand for more studies, more personnel, greater influence and bigger budgets. Believing this demagoguery is the greatest peril.
https://nypost.com/2014/09/28/feeding-america-public-service-lies/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But most of all, the ads inform us of a horror we’d otherwise think impossible: America has so failed its children that 17 million — one in five — don’t have enough to eat.
Except that, enjoyable as all this self-loathing might seem, it’s simply a fairy tale.
America’s children aren’t starving, not even slightly — not by any measure, survey or study.
If anything, too many kids are eating too much of the wrong stuff. Which is why the nation’s first lady is leading an anti-obesity campaign.
The only basis for Feeding America’s claim comes from US Department of Agriculture surveys in which heads of households were asked if at any time during a calendar year their children were a) unable to eat what they wanted; b) unable to eat in whatever quantity they wanted; c) forced to eat cheaper brands, or d) afraid their food supply might run out on any single day.
Fully 85.5 percent said “no”; just 14.5 percent replied “yes.”
The Agriculture Department tendentiously labels the latter group “food insecure.” And it is from this number, and this number alone, that Feeding America gets its nonsensical claim that one in five kids is fighting starvation daily.
The truth is far different; this is an issue that’s been studied for decades.
Look at Census polling that asks heads of households if any member of the family missed even a single meal, on one day a year, because of a lack of resources: Only 0.01 percent said “yes” — one out of 1,000.
This is what US taxpayers should expect: We spend almost $1 trillion a year on state and federal safety-net programs for the 46 million people defined as living in poverty ($21,000 per individual, nearly $87,000 per family of four).
But what harm is it if “Feeding America” exaggerates in order to get nutritious food to poor kids who do fall through the cracks?
Well, the motive here isn’t remotely altruistic. Forbes magazine lists Feeding America as the fourth-largest nonprofit in America.
And, as Paul Roderick Gregory notes in a Forbes column, the group’s “CEO earns over a half million dollars.
Its corporate sponsors represent America’s largest agribusiness companies, food processors and retailers (Conagra, Food Lion, General Mills, Kelloggs, Kroger, Pepsico and Walmart).”
If you make or sell food, you want to inculcate brand loyalty at the youngest age possible. And to get the public thinking we’re still not spending enough on food — never mind that 35 percent of poor kids are obese.
But the damage from the Feeding America campaign is far more insidious. Above all else, it promotes the perception that our free-market system — which, lest we forget, enables America to be the most generous and socially conscious country in history — has barely progressed beyond the sweat-shop era.
In other words, the campaign doesn’t just serve the interests of Big (Agri)Business, it boosts Big Government.
“Propaganda skillfully employed will convince people living in paradise they are living in hell, and people living in hell they are living in paradise”: That’s how Adolf Hitler once put it.
The Feeding America spots are distributed via the Ad Council, the nonprofit public-service-announcement broker that for 70 years has been addressing us as dimwitted 10-year-olds, forever warning of looming menace on our perilous journey from erection to resurrection.
Not coincidentally, the US Department of Agriculture is a major Ad Council client.
By feeding the false perception of rampant child hunger, the Ad Council is aiding and abetting the eternal bureaucratic demand for more studies, more personnel, greater influence and bigger budgets. Believing this demagoguery is the greatest peril.
