Lawmakers Urge Federal Trade Commission to Take Action Against Online Ads for Junk Foods
A group of lawmakers has called on the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to tackle online advertisements for junk foods ostensibly aimed at younger viewers.
The bipartisan group of lawmakers led by U.S. Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) made the request in a June 17 letter addressed to FTC Chairwoman Lina Khan and four other commissioners. It urged the FTC to update its decade-old report on food marketing to children and adolescents, emphasizing the need to address the rapidly evolving landscape of digital advertising.
“We are alarmed by the proliferation of unhealthy food and beverage marketing directed toward children across online platforms,” the letter read. “Such marketing can impact children’s food preferences, purchase requests [and] consumption patterns, and could ultimately contribute to unhealthy eating patterns that increase the risk of chronic disease.”
The lawmakers characterized the need for regulatory action as urgent, in light of projected increases in childhood diabetes rates and the billions spent annually on influencer marketing. “We appreciate the FTC’s consideration of this letter and we hope to see [the commission] further its work to protect children from online marketing of unhealthy foods and beverages,” the letter continued.
The correspondence by Booker and his colleagues in Congress zoomed in on two particular aspects of this online marketing. First, they expressed worry about how companies target ads to children in different socioeconomic and demographic groups. They cited a study that found Black children were exposed to between 86 and 119 percent more food and beverage TV ads than their White peers.
Second, they highlighted the growing role of social media influencers in promoting unhealthy foods to young audiences. “There are countless recent examples of influencers on TikTok promoting food and beverage products where it is not always made clear the influencer is being paid to promote these products or has a material connection to the brand,” the lawmakers noted.
Companies spend BILLIONS to bombard kids with ads
Lindsey Smith Taillie, associate professor at the University of North Carolina‘s Gillings School of Global Public Health, put in her two cents on the effects of digital marketing for unhealthy foods in an April op-ed published in The Hill.
She recounted how her four-year-old child saw an ad for a candy brand during Super Bowl 2024. Two weeks after that, Taillie’s child still remembered the ad – and right in time for their supermarket visit.
“A 30-second commercial seems harmless. However, new research shows that food marketing to kids is more than a nuisance. It’s a key driver of poor diets,” Taillie wrote.
(Related: Junk food ads on TV strongly influence children’s eating habits.)
“Food marketing impacts what kids like, buy and eat – increasing the risk of dental caries, obesity and Type 2 diabetes. Like tobacco, tighter regulation of junk food marketing to children is needed to protect their health.”
According to her, digital marketing is particularly worrisome as it does not look like marketing. This “disguised” promotion, she added, “limits kids’ ability to distinguish these marketing techniques from unbranded content.”
Taillie ultimately concluded: “Food marketing hooks kids on unhealthy foods, creating poor eating habits that can last a lifetime. Children deserve to live, learn and play free from the influence of the junk food industry, [and] regulations on food marketing can help.”
Head over to JunkFood.news for similar stories.
Trump’s Would-Be Assassin Reportedly Flew a Drone Over the Fairgrounds Before the Speech & Could Have Dropped Explosives on Trump
Immediately after every mass shooting, fake news jumps to the podium to declare it was a “lone shooter” with a “long gun.” No matter how many bullets are fired, from how many directions, and no matter what intel, equipment, planning, recon and technology was involved, the narrative stays the same from day one. Plus, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Central Intelligence Agency never ever have any security footage from mass shootings. Why? Is that all just too difficult for the 3-stooges-like FBI to handle?
Well, it’s supposedly not too much for a “lone gunman” who’s twenty years old and can’t shoot a watermelon with a rifle from 100 yards away. They’re saying Thomas Matthew Crooks worked alone to try to murder former President Donald Trump, but did he? If he was working alone, why did he have drones, multiple ladders, multiple encrypted cell phones and a homemade IED with a detonator (but he supposedly did not do any research on how to construct a bomb)?
The bigger question looms: Why didn’t Trump’s security teams fly their own drones over the fairgrounds before and during the event? That would have spotted the “lone shooter” on the roof, spotted his drone flying over beforehand, and been proof to the world (and the liberal conspiracy theorists) that the assassination attempt was not “staged,” or at least not by Trump’s side.
Thomas Matthew Crooks flew a drone repeatedly over the fairgrounds and could have easily dropped and detonated explosives on Trump during the speech
It’s now becoming quite obvious that the Deep State planned Trump’s assassination, and that Crooks did NOT work alone, but more as the patsy who himself was assassinated for his participation. If Crooks was too incompetent to build his own improvised explosive device, according to the FBI’s research, then how did he get it? Also, why didn’t Crooks rig his drone to drop the bomb on Trump, just to be sure he finished the “job?” Maybe there’s a reason they’re called “secret service,” because there’s much more to this story to be told, that’s all being covered up.
Why didn’t the Secret Service have their own drones for aerial security footage? Why were there absolutely ZERO security cameras set up and running before and during the Trump speech? Why were the Secret Service afraid to stand on a slightly slanted rooftop, when another group of security officials had no problem doing the same, on an even more slanted roof, that still wasn’t even dangerous, compared to what most roofers function atop?
Why is the FBI stonewalling Freedom of Information Act requests? What do they have to hide? Shouldn’t every Secret Service employee and other hired “help” be tried for conspiracy to commit murder, since there is so much evidence now that all of these “lapses” in security are more like complacency in a well-drafted plan to allow a shooter to take several pot shots at Trump, and even prepare with drone footage, homemade explosives, encrypted cell phones and accounts overseas, equipment he couldn’t carry alone, and access to buildings where secret service were inside eating donuts and drinking coffee?
The number one tell-tale sign that this whole assassination attempt was a set-up by the Deep State is that Director of the Secret Service Kimberly Cheatle claims that the reason her own anti-sniper snipers weren’t on the roof of the barn is because she didn’t want them to fall off and get hurt. Take one look at that roof and you will see it’s barely slanted at all. Big lie.
The other tell-tale sign is the puts investors placed against Trump assets and Rumble, knowing their values would tumble if Trump got killed, and they would make billions of dollars. Follow the bouncing ball folks.
Don’t forget to tune your apocalypse dial to Preparedness.news for updates on real news about the surviving and thriving what the communists in D.C. have planned for Trump and the rest of us next.
Ontario Gov’t Drops Over 100 Fines from Covid Era for Compliance Violations
(LifeSiteNews) — Canadian pro-freedom legal advocacy group The Democracy Fund (TDF) says that because of generous donor support it secured the staying or withdrawal of 109 COVID-era tickets given to multiple people in Ontario.
The TDF said in a press update sent to LifeSiteNews that most often the charges were withdrawn or stayed “due to a lack of reasonable prospect of conviction, delay, non-appearance of the government’s witness at trial, or a decision taken by the Crown not to proceed.”
“It’s gratifying to see our hard work pay off, and a relief to our clients who have endured years of legal uncertainty,” TDF paralegal Jenna Little said.
“But the government is still doggedly pursuing many clients for charges that should not have been brought in the first place and consume scarce judicial resources.”
The TDF observed that its clients were charged under the Quarantine Act s.15 (failure to provide information to screening officer), s.58 (failure to complete ArriveCan, failure to arrange for quarantine), or s.66 (obstruct an officer).
It noted that the fine for each charge was around $5,000, with “with potential total fines for conviction on all charges reaching $681,250.”
“Though many of these cases have been successfully resolved, many remain,” the TDF said.
Some of the charges were issued under the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act, such as s.7.0.11 (obstruct an officer), which can carry a one-year jail sentence and a $10,000 fine.
The TDF stated that in “rare cases” some clients were also charged under “s.10 of the Reopening Act (gather or fail to close premises).”
“Fines under those statutes range from $125 to $19,000,” the TDF said.
The TDF noted that despite the recent court wins, there are still “hundreds” of clients who are facing “potential fines and jail time for peacefully protesting or objecting to government overreach during COVID lockdowns.”
The TDF said that during COVID the government used the opportunity to enact “rights-infringing, overbroad laws.”
“Legislators and bureaucrats zealously enforced these laws against Canadians in an effort to secure compliance and suppress peaceful protest. Fortunately, The Democracy Fund (TDF) and its team of lawyers and paralegals, with the support of generous donors, fought back,” it said.
The TDF, founded in 2021, bills itself as a Canadian charity “dedicated to constitutional rights, advancing education and relieving poverty,” by promoting constitutional rights “through litigation and public education.”
In early July, LifeSiteNews reported that TDF lawyers helped get criminal charges against a Canadian man who participated in the pro-family 1 Million March 4 Children protest over radical LGBT ideology being taught in public schools dropped by the Crown.
Over the last couple of years, the TDF has been active in helping Canadians persecuted under COVID mandates and rules fight back. Notable people it has helped include Dr. Kulvinder Kaur Gill, an Ontario pediatrician who has been embroiled in a legal battle with the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO) for her anti-COVID views. She has also had the help of Elon Musk.
COVID vaccine mandates, which came from provincial governments with the support of the federal government, split Canadian society. The mRNA shots have been linked to a multitude of negative and often severe side effects in children.
Political Analysts: Biden’s Withdrawal From Presidential Race has Left the Democrats in Turmoil
Political analysts have warned that the withdrawal of President Joe Biden from the 2024 presidential race has left the Democratic Party in turmoil less than four months before Election Day.
On July 21, the 81-year-old Biden announced in a post on X that he would step aside as the Democratic Party’s nominee in the 2024 presidential race and endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris as his replacement. He followed this up with an address from the White House. The announcement came after weeks of mounting pressure from fellow Democrats due to a disastrous debate performance against former President Donald Trump in June.
However, Kyle Kondik, the managing editor for Sabato’s Crystal Ball at the University of Virginia’sCenter for Politics, stated that this decision is unprecedented in modern American politics.
“We’re in uncharted territory here,” Kondik said.
Biden, having secured nearly all pledged delegates, becomes the first presumptive nominee of a major party to withdraw after the primaries have concluded. Unlike historical conventions before the 1972 primary system overhaul, where outcomes were often uncertain, recent decades have seen a more predictable nomination process.
“I don’t really think there’s any good recent precedent for it. Half a century or more ago, it wasn’t uncommon to go into the convention not necessarily knowing for sure who the nominee was going to be,” Kondik said. “But since then, we haven’t had this sort of situation where somebody dominates the primary season – but then steps aside later, in advance of the convention.”
With no historical precedent, Democrats must improvise within their guidelines to select a new nominee.
Biden’s endorsement of Harris, coupled with support from prominent Democrats, bolsters her position. Senators, state leaders and governors, including potential rivals like California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, have publicly backed her. Kondik claimed that Harris’ national recognition and existing campaign infrastructure make her the “path of least resistance.”
Similarly, Meena Bose, a political science professor at Hofstra University, claimed that Harris is the most logical choice for a seamless transition.
Hans Noel, a professor at Georgetown University’s Department of Government, also suggested that voters would expect Harris to assume the nomination, considering her role as vice president and strong party support. However, Noel warned that nominating someone else could be seen as bypassing a Black woman, potentially alienating key constituencies within the party.
“The vice presidential candidate does not automatically become the presidential candidate, but I think a lot of voters would sort of expect that,” Noel said in an email to Al Jazeera. “Given that she’s in that position, there are a lot of reasons not to go to someone else. She does have a lot of support in the party, but more importantly, nominating someone else would look like skipping over a Black woman, which would not look good for many in the party.”
However, questions about the fate of Biden’s campaign funds also emerged. Launching a new and successful presidential campaign still demands substantial resources, including massive investments of time, money and manpower.
(Related: Top advisor warns Biden: Campaign donations are rapidly drying up.)
“Campaigns take huge amounts of infrastructure, money [and] messaging to get through to the voters that we know are most undecided,” said Casey Burgat, the director of the Legislative Affairs program at George Washington University’s Graduate School of Political Management.
Voters have a lot to say about Biden’s withdrawal from the 2024 presidential election
Harris has emerged as the early favorite to replace Biden, especially after receiving his endorsement. But reactions from voters are another concern.
Some Biden supporters felt energized by the prospect of a different candidate, specifically Harris, potentially having a stronger chance against former President Donald Trump. However, not all voters are rallying behind Harris. In Butler, Pennsylvania, Angela Bost stated that Harris’ gender might be a barrier for some voters.
“I think a lot of men might not be all right with that,” she said. Casey Brett, a Democratic voter from Grand Rapids, Michigan, described Harris as “the safe choice” but questioned if she was the best option.
Some voters are even suggesting alternative candidates. Ron Brooker, a 77-year-old Phoenix resident, mentioned Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ), as a potential nominee. Others have floated former First Lady Michelle Obama as a possible candidate.
Among Trump supporters, Biden’s exit has bolstered their resolve. Tyler Kunkowski, 18, a Republican from Florida, viewed the news as advantageous for Trump.
“A lot of Democrats do not support Kamala Harris, and no other candidate has enough time to get a strong campaign together by election time,” he said. Casey Bushick, 34, from Atlanta, expressed steadfast support for Trump.
For independent voters, Biden’s exit presents new opportunities. Steven Dilts, an independent voter from Alaska, sees this as a chance for independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. “I think this is Kennedy’s chance,” Dilts said, believing that Biden supporters might align more with Kennedy than Harris.
Head over to JoeBiden.news for more stories about the incumbent president.
Kamala Harris Receives Enough Delegate Support to Win Democrat Presidential Nomination
(LifeSiteNews) — Pro-abortion Vice President Kamala Harris has secured enough support from Democratic delegates to win the party’s nomination for president, multiple outlets are reporting.
Following a slew of endorsements from prominent Democratic politicians, including Bill and Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, and Governors Gavin Newsom and Gretchen Whitmer, Harris surpassed the necessary 1,986 pledged delegates needed to become the nominee late Monday evening.
While Harris’ status would not become official until the party’s convention in Chicago on August 19-22, she is the only candidate who has received support from any of the delegates thus far. Current party rules stipulate that candidates need at least 300 delegates for their name to appear on the convention’s ballot.
Harris, 59, was a U.S. senator for the state of California from 2017 until 2021. She was the state’s attorney general from 2011 until 2017. In 2016, she directed law enforcement to raid the home of pro-life hero David Daleiden after he released an undercover video of Planned Parenthood officials discussing the sale of body parts of aborted babies.
READ: Kamala Harris’ campaign could pose a unique threat to the future of the pro-life movement
During her time in the U.S. Senate and White House, Harris has unabashedly promoted abortion, LGBT ideology, and other left-wing policies. In March 2024, she became the first sitting vice president to personally tour an abortion facility when she visited a Planned Parenthood center in St. Paul, Minnesota. In 2019, she attacked Trump judicial nominee Brian Buescher for being a member of the Catholic fraternal organization Knights of Columbus due to its pro-life and pro-marriage stances.
The Democratic National Committee has said it plans to move forward with a virtual vote before August 7 to decide its presidential and vice-presidential nominees. Harris is all but a lock to win, although who her running mate will be is still a question mark. At present, Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro and Arizona Senator Mark Kelly are believed to be among the odds-on favorites.
As reported by The Hill, Tennessee, South Carolina, North Carolina, New Hampshire, Louisiana, and Florida were among the first states to award their delegates to Harris after Biden announced he was stepping aside. Delegations from more than a dozen other states have also held meetings since then to pledge their verbal support for her.
Speculation as to why Biden decided to not seek re-election has been widespread on social media. Some believe he experienced an unexpected medical emergency while in Las Vegas recently and that remarks made by his brother Frank to CBS about enjoying “whatever time we have left” with him indicates he is near death. GOP Congressman Thomas Massie has said that a “coup” has taken place.
If a coup happened in your own country would you recognize it?
— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) July 22, 2024
This is a coup of a puppet regime.
Why is he even in the White House now?
On Monday, Harris held a bizarre press conference where Biden allegedly phoned in to wish her luck in her run. Biden’s voice had a noticeable slur or lisp sound to it, prompting many to wonder if it was recreated by artificial intelligence. Harris herself at one point during the event said, “Thanks for being on the reco–on the call, Joe,” giving more reason that it was just an act with a recorded voice of Biden.
NOW – Kamala speaks to Biden over phone at campaign HQ: “It is so good to hear our President’s voice. Joe, I know you’re still on the reco… on the call… and we’ve been talking everyday…”pic.twitter.com/i6MyVAB9M3
— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) July 22, 2024
Democrat-turned-independent Robert F. Kennedy Jr. blasted Harris during a press conference after Biden dropped out. “Kamala Harris is a war hawk on Ukraine, she’s a war hawk on China,” he said. She’s “a product of the corporate control of our democracy.”
Republicans are drawing attention to the legal hurdles Democrats will face in replacing Biden’s name on state ballots. According to Fox News, the Washington D.C.-based Heritage Foundation is already preparing lawsuits over the matter. Fox is reporting that “many states – including swing states such as Georgia, Nevada and Wisconsin – might not allow a replacement on the ballot.” Wisconsin specifically “does not allow a candidate’s name to be withdrawn from the ballot except due to death.”
Speaker Mike Johnson reiterated the GOP’s intention to file briefs with the court system during an interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper.
As I said this morning, every state has their own election system and the Democrat party will face legal challenges in trying to remove Biden from the top of the ticket.
— Speaker Mike Johnson (@SpeakerJohnson) July 22, 2024
Turns out the so-called “party of democracy” thinks it can overrule the votes of over 14 million Americans. pic.twitter.com/4zBYhuPxcn
“Every state has their own election system, and the Democrat Party will face legal challenges in trying to remove Biden from the top of the ticket,” he said in an X post. “Turns out the so-called ‘party of democracy’ thinks it can overrule the votes of over 14 million Americans.”
Harris is married to Doug Emhoff, who is Jewish. In the 1990s, as a 29-year-old, she dated 60-year-old Willie Brown, then-speaker of the California Assembly who was not yet divorced from his wife. Brown appointed Harris to two political commissions, a move that has been criticized as a sign of favoritism. While she is a stepmother to Emhoff’s two daughters, Harris does not have any children of her own.
Number of Ukrainians Open to Territorial Concessions Growing – Poll
The number of Ukrainians willing to make territorial concessions to Moscow in exchange for peace has tripled over the past year, according to a recent poll by the Kiev International Institute of Sociology (KIIS). The survey released on Tuesday shows that 32% of respondents said they believe that “for the sake of achieving peace as soon as possible and preserving its independence Ukraine could relinquish some of its territory,” compared to just 10% who said the same in May 2023.
The poll was conducted in two waves on May 16-22 and June 20-25, involving 1,067 and 2,008 respondents, respectively.
The number of Ukrainians open to territorial concessions remained below 10% throughout the first year of the conflict, but has steadily grown since May 2023, according to the previous polls conducted by the KIIS.
In the end of 2023, after the much-hyped Ukrainian summer counteroffensive ended in a failure, 19% of respondents said they would agree to ceding some land in exchange for peace. In February 2024, when the Russian troops launched an offensive of their own and seized the strategic Donbass town of Avdeevka, this number grew to 26%.
Read more Poll suggests growing number of Ukrainians want peace talks
In May 2024, when Moscow’s forces launched another offensive in the northeastern Ukrainian Kharkov Region, it further rose to 32%, according to the KIIS. The number of those opposing any concessions fell from 74% to 55% over the same period.
As part of the latest survey, the respondents were also presented with several models of a potential peace agreement between Kiev and Moscow. The first option saw Russia retaining control of Crimea and the four other former Ukrainian territories, and Kiev abandoning its NATO ambitions and only joining the EU. This model was backed by 38% of respondents, with 30% calling it a “difficult” but “acceptable”option. More than a half of respondents (54%) rejected it.
The second option had Russia keeping the newly acquired territories but allowing Ukraine to join both NATO and the EU. Almost half of respondents backed it (47%), while 38% rejected it.
Read more Most Ukrainians ‘don’t feel European’ – poll
The third option had Moscow ceding control over the regions of Kherson and Zaporozhye back to Kiev, but keeping the two Donbass republics and Crimea. Ukraine would also join both the EU and NATO. This model was backed by 57% of respondents, with 20% calling it an “easily acceptable deal.” A third of respondents rejected it.
The negotiations between Russia and Ukraine broke down in the spring of 2022, with both sides accusing each other of making unrealistic demands. Russia President Vladimir Putin has said that Ukraine must become a neutral country and renounce claims on the new Russian regions for any peace talks to succeed.