TV CSR: Did Jamie Oliver's food revolution work?

CSR, it turns out, makes great reality TV. How could it not? Likeable people, out there, trying to change the world… in this context, Jamie Oliver's Food Revolution seems to be ABC's answer to Fox's Undercover Boss, a show I've celebrated previously. In Food Revolution, the UK's lispy, cutie Jamie Oliver -famous as the "naked" chef and 2010 TED top social entrepreneur - travels to Huntington, West Virginia, the center of the region the Center for Disease Control ranked as the unhealthiest place in America. He launches a campaign to teach everyone to make simple meals of whole foods- most frequently choosing spaghetti and salad, a simple stirfry, and roasted chicken. He pairs this with a dual effort to reform the lunches served in elementary and high schools. The last episode shows that without Oliver's enthusiastic, dynamic energy and plucky British phrases, Huntington's Food Revolution loses significant momentum. The question is; is this just TV, or does it actually matter?

This isn't the first time Oliver has done this; indeed, Food Revolution is the American version of the UK's Feed Me Better. In the UK, he leveraged a similar war on crappy food also through an episodic documentary. Interestingly, Oliver faced similar problems on both sides of the Atlantic. There was resistance to change from the schools themselves, including from the kids (in the UK, students actually boycotted healthy foods, and the American elementary school children did just as much by being apathetic about it). Both countries feature ornery lunchladies (along with lovable ones…). The government was a big problem in both countries; in the US, USDA food regulation red tape both perpetuated poor habits and restricted schools from independently doing more to improve their students menus. Money was a key issue; schools don't serve this food for fun- it's cheap, and in both countries, but particularly in America, and particularly in rural West Virginia, the school systems are underfunded.

Points of Food Revolution were incredibly touching, particularly the activism from high school students eager to change their own lives and the future of their community. Parts were hilarious and poignant; in a personal outreach effort, Oliver teaches a specific family better cooking habits. Step one included literally burying the fryolater in the backyard like a dead pet. One also must admire Oliver's incredible ability, perhaps eased by the camera crew hovering around him, to flip enemies into allies.

The British government is said to have committed to reform on the issue, and then-minister Tony Blair committed notable money- $280 million pounds- to improve food quality in schools. In the US, Oliver was successful in getting the local Cabell Huntington Hospital to pony up the funding to train the school lunch staff in meal preparation. Those are wins, right?

Oliver has hit upon a profitable formula of CSR, TV, and nutrition that is winning him mountainous accolades. What he is doing is important, and manages to efficiently educate widely: viewers cannot avoid thinking about their own eating habits. There's a question as to how lasting the changes he seeks to implement are, but who cares. He's one guy; systematic change will take more than Jamie Oliver. But to quote the great Bruce Springsteen, "You can't start a fire without a spark."