OPINION: Childhood obesity initiative is really about race

Charlton McIlwain is an associate professor of media, culture and communication at New York University and co-director of The Project on Race in Political Communication (www.raceproject.org).

President Barack Obama celebrated Black History Month this week amid ongoing criticism that he continues to actively avoid talking about race. Race scholars say the first black president has a responsibility to lead the country in a conversation about the issue, while black elected officials demand he carve out race-specific policy proposals.

But in characteristic fashion, the president and first lady, Michelle Obama, subtly addressed their race critics. Their response: a nationwide legislative initiative to reduce childhood obesity.

Though the Obamas do not frame it this way, childhood obesity is the kind of race-targeted policy initiative minority legislators should want the president to push. Further, it provides several talking points to stimulate the kind of renewed conversation about race that many Americans hoped Obama would lead throughout his presidency.

While it may sound like purely a health problem, childhood obesity is a race problem. The most recent data put out by the government's chief public health agency, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, show that African-American, Latino and American Indian children from ages 5 through 19 are significantly more likely to be overweight than white children.

This means that children of racial minorities are at greater risk for life-threatening chronic diseases such as diabetes. This seriously reduces the potential life expectancy and quality of life for children of color in unequal ways when compared to their white counterparts.

It may not be affirmative action, racial profiling or employment discrimination, but the inextricable link between race and childhood obesity makes it as significant a racial policy issue as any, especially given what's at stake.

Because of this, the childhood obesity problem in the United States provides several important talking points that should spark significant conversations about race - from the halls of Congress to corporate boardrooms, television studios on down to community centers and civic-organization meeting places throughout the country.

We might talk about why fast food chains choose to do more business in black and Latino neighborhoods, while healthier supermarkets flourish in white neighborhoods. A survey of almost 60 studies between 1985 and 2008 shows that minority neighborhoods are most adversely affected by having less access to healthy food and greater access to less healthy fast food.

We might also talk about why fast food chains persist in the unethical targeting of racial minorities, especially using images of high-profile African- American celebrities - like basketball great Charles Barkley for Taco Bell - to market their food, or increasingly pushing their products on Spanish-language TV stations like Univision. Studies have shown that this kind of advertising has significant persuasive effects on racial minority consumers.

We might even go so far as to discuss why, 50 years since the civil rights movement, many whites and blacks still prefer to live in segregated neighborhoods in the first place, and why planners and certain real estate practices continue to promote residential segregation. Studies by the University of Michigan's Population Studies Center consistently show high levels of racial segregation, especially in large cities. And Long Island is considered one of the most segregated suburban areas in the country.

For those clamoring for Obama to champion racial policy, here it is. For those insisting he lead a national dialogue about race, consider this his opening statement. The question is, will the rest of us pick up on the conversation?