Inside D.C.

“Spinning Food” Out of Control

Friends of the Earth (FOE) this week unveiled “Spinning Food,” a 62-page issue manifesto/pity party, and the most naïve publication I’ve ever seen created by an activist group.  Sent to the media and subtitled “how food industry front groups and covert communications are shaping the story of food,” this overwritten whine is supposed to be an expose, a prose warning to the Fourth Estate that the “industrial food and agriculture sector” is spending big bucks to “manipulate the public conversation about our food.”

All I can say is FOE’s correct, we’ve been unmasked.  The food industry is talking to consumers about where their food comes from – and it’s about time.

My initial reaction to the report was that it was a spoof from The Onion.  It’s not.  It took three people to write it, half a dozen to review, “fact check” and design it, and “generous support” from the Food & Farm Communications Fund (www.foodandfarmcommunications.org) and in-kind donations from the Real Food Media Project (www.realfoodmedia.org).  None of these folks – including the mob of TV chefs and restaurateurs affiliated with the underwriters – is to be held responsible for the opinions in the report, any errors or omissions.  Those fall on the shoulders of the authors and FOE, and based on the number of “errors” I found just scanning the report, those shoulders must be, well, huge.

FOE alleges the food industry writ large – including farmers, ranchers, input companies, vet drug companies, tech companies, processors and retailers – used 14 industry groups to spend $126 million in “covert communications” to mislead consumers about the benefits or lack thereof of organic foods; the value and use of technology generally, but biotech specifically; the use of third party experts to provide dispassionate opinions and expertise, as well as “coordinated messages by seemingly independent spokespeople” to tell the planet, among other things that “organic food isn’t worth the money” and “GMOs are needed to feed the world.”

I know – because it’s in the report – that FOE and its ilk use social media and I assume have benefitted over time from “in kind” PR advice and support to convince the public food producers are in business to poison consumers for profit, whereas “advocates” are righteous messengers of truth.  The report criticizes the food industry for “deploying front groups…in fact, made up of industry or PR professionals to promote their messages,” targeting female audiences by “trying to coopt female bloggers,” and “elevating female spokespeople,” promoting messages to disparage ‘organic moms’ as “elitist bullies,” yadda, yadda, yadda.

The report includes a list of the “Top 11 Food & Agriculture Industry Front Groups.”  Among these “front groups” are organizations around since 1978.  In the case of one of the groups listed – the Animal Agriculture Alliance (AAA) – I can personally attest for its reason for being because I founded the group.

In 1987, AAA was born as the Animal Industry Foundation (AIF). It was created because producers were increasingly frustrated by activist groups disparaging, nay, lying about what farmers and ranchers do 24/7/365, how well they do it and the contribution these efforts make to every citizen’s quality of life. Because of the food industry’s collective silence and the increasing drumbeat of the anti-technology activists, no one was providing the truth about modern agriculture to the consumer, so AIF was born, morphing into AAA.

Another list resident, the Alliance for Food & Farming (AFF), founded in 1989, sees it’s listing in the FOE report as a sorta kinda left-handed compliment.  AFF spends its $250,000 annual budget generally countering claims organic produce is somehow safer than conventional produce.  In a blog post, AFF said, “FOE’s report acknowledges the AFF’s impact with a ‘relatively small budget.’  Really, the inclusion of AFF by FOE should be viewed as yet another indicator we are having success in our mission to provide credible, science-based information to consumers so that facts, not fear, can guide shopping choices.”

The rest of the “top 11” exist for fundamentally the same reasons as AAA and AFF, that is, to get the truth out while debunking the myths spread by the “foodies” and groups like FOE.

The FOE hissy fit is apparently inspired by the fact the food industry is worlds more sophisticated in its use of social media and communications than it has been over time.  Apparently, FOE and its cohorts must feel they’re starting to lose the battle for the hearts and minds of consumers.