HIGH STAKES
THIS ISSUE: FOOD SAFETY
Last week, the New York Times reported that, after decades of progress, food safety in the United States is no longer improving. New data in March revealed that American anxiety over food safety is on a par with concerns about the War on Terror. And just days ago, the latest food safety-related recall (of a million pounds of pistachios) again brought the issue to the forefront.
With consumer anxiety and regulator interest reaching such unprecedented levels, it’s more important than ever that the industry be seen as part of the solution rather than part of the problem.
In this issue, we review a most significant example of effective food safety crisis response…Gain insight from David Schmidt, President and CEO of the International Food Information Council…Take a look at the blogs at the center of food safety discussion…And discuss how brand-name companies and suppliers will increasingly need to work together to contain the brand damage that food safety crises incur.
Strategies: The way our food safety system should work
News that a million pounds of pistachios were recalled in late March due to potential salmonella contamination played like a rerun of a movie we’ve just seen. Yet one company provided a communications template for how to best deal with potential outbreaks.
In the wake of numerous food safety-related recalls that are causing unprecedented levels of fear and an aggressive government crackdown, Kraft Foods’ response to the pistachio contamination provided a salient reminder of why a total regulatory overhaul may be unnecessary if brand-name food companies act appropriately.
What set Kraft Foods’ response apart?
- First, the company had effective safety systems already in place, so Kraft was able to detect the contamination during routine internal testing and then immediately alerted the Food and Drug Administration. This kind of due diligence and transparency was entirely absent during January’s peanut butter recall – and thousands of consumers suffered as a result.
- Second, Kraft voluntarily pulled pistachios from the shelves before receiving any reports of illness or even a government warning. As a result, the FDA Associate Commissioner for Food Safety seemed confident enough to state that “we are not dealing an outbreak here” only days after the contamination was discovered.
- Third, thanks to Kraft’s cooperation with supplier Setton Farms, answers as to questions about what caused the contamination were available almost immediately. When it was explained that the mixing of raw and roasted nuts at Setton’s California processing facility was to blame, the confusion that typically drives consumer anxiety during food safety scares was virtually eliminated.
Clearly, Kraft understood that transparency, action, and answers calm public nerves and contain the brand damage that may result from any high-profile food safety incident.
Furthermore, Kraft demonstrated just how effective the existing food safety framework can be when industry (both brand-name companies and lesser known suppliers) and government work together rather than play cat-and-mouse.
Simply put, it's how our food safety systems are intended to work. As of this writing, no known illnesses have been reported due to contaminated pistachios, and Kraft is realizing the branding benefits of acting as a responsible steward of the public welfare.
Industry insight: David Schmidt, President and CEO of the International Food Information Council
As President and CEO of the International Food Information Council (IFIC) since 2006, David Schmidt is responsible for bridging the gap between science and communications by collecting and disseminating information on food safety, nutrition, and health - and translating that data into practicable guidelines for opinion leaders and, ultimately, consumers.
A former Director of External Affairs for the Food Safety and Inspection Service and one of the nation’s foremost experts on food safety, Mr. Schmidt shared his insights with High Stakes™:
What is driving the recent high levels of consumer anxiety when it comes to food safety?
David Schmidt: The most recent episode involving peanut butter (a product that is widely used by consumers in a number of forms) really shook the public’s confidence –and it was all because a single company didn’t follow industry standard safety precautions. This incident affected so many people that it simply can’t be ignored – and it comes on top of a series of produce-related safety issues that we’ve seen over the last couple of years. Naturally, many consumers have questions as to what’s going on.
When one company is forced to issue a recall of such magnitude, can all companies end up being painted with the same brush?
David Schmidt: I do think that there is potential for that. Some consumers have their favorite brands. They have trust in those brands. And some companies are doing a good job of communicating with their consumers about the safety precautions they have in place and what they are doing to ensure that they continue to produce the safest food possible – whether they have experienced a recall or not.
The important thing for companies involved in a recall is to notify consumers and get the products in question off the shelves immediately. The important thing for companies not involved in the recall is to recognize the inherent opportunity to speak to consumers about what they’re doing to ensure that a similar situation never arises. Either way, being proactive in your communications with consumers is absolutely essential. If you do that, you stand a very good chance of retaining your loyal customer base.
With the likelihood of regulatory intervention increasing, are there opportunities for government and industry to work together to enhance food safety?
David Schmidt: One of President Obama’s weekly radio addresses last month dealt heavily with food safety – and to have the President so involved is almost unprecedented. This involvement makes it an important time for companies to: a) communicate the safety measures that are in place; and b) acknowledge that they can always get better. There’s no such thing as zero risk but if good ideas are coming from government, from academia, or from others within the industry, then companies need to be willing to engage in a dialogue about those ideas to ensure that consumer confidence in food safety is retained.
What’s next with regard to food safety? Are there issues emerging on the horizon that food companies need to be aware of?
David Schmidt: As our food supply has become even more global, and our ability to detect problems in food has never been better, it is inevitable that we are going to continue to learn more about pathogens and what can be done to contain them. That means companies need to redouble their efforts to ensure that their supply – all the way down from production origins – is safe and consistent and that all the safety steps they have taken are working. There is no room for mistakes. You have to have great specifications and be willing to put verification measures in place so that problems can be discovered before a product ever goes to market.
I also think that we’re going to see bills coming from Congress that will buttress regulatory efforts on food safety, place greater accountability on industry, and raise the overall awareness of food safety issues simply because they are being discussed on the national stage.
One major problem that could be addressed is the confusing nature of the public food safety infrastructure. There are so many agencies with so many overlapping responsibilities that it’s next to impossible for most consumers to know who in government is actually responsible for keeping our food safe. IFIC recently published “A Concise Guide to the U.S. Food Regulatory System,” which is a valuable tool for anyone who wants to learn more about how food is regulated in America. Because, after all, in order to make informed decisions as to where food safety needs to go tomorrow, we need an accurate picture of where we are today.
To learn more about the IFIC, its mission, and its work, click here.
Blogs and food safety
The plaintiffs’ bar usesthe blogosphere as a tool to raise food safety issues, put the spotlight on industry shortcomings, and recruit class action litigants. At the same time, the blogosphere is also your best source for intelligence on where food safety litigation may be heading next.
Here’s a look at two plaintiffs’ blogs you should be watching:
Marler Blog
Published by the attorneys at Marler Clark LLP in Seattle, Marler Blog discusses the most recent food safety issues from a plaintiff’s perspective. Feature stories detailing victims’ stories, recall developments, and new laws and litigation underscore the firm’s food safety expertise.
Class Action Blog
The class action law firm Meiselman, Denlea, Packman, Carton & Eberz PC produces the Class Action Blog, which concentrates on issues related to potential food safety class action litigation.
And on the defense side...
Food Liability Law Blog
The Food Liability Law Blog, maintained by Stoel Rives LLP, covers “emerging legal threats to the food industry.” By highlighting food safety problems, regulatory solutions, and general food safety events, this blog has become a go-to information source.
Consumer Class Actions & Mass Torts
This blog, maintained Russell Jackson at Skadden Arps, covers recent events related to food safety class action litigation.
What’s next? Suffering for the sins of suppliers
With increasing frequency, brand-name food companies are suffering for the sins of suppliers to whom they have outsourced the production of ingredients. Unlike the supply chains of 40 years ago, food, drug, and consumer product companies now seldom own or operate the plants where raw ingredients for their branded products are made. That makes it harder to control quality and especially challenging to streamline a crisis response when an outbreak and subsequent recall occurs.
For example, in the case of the peanut butter recalls of early 2009, Kellogg, McKee Foods, and other branded food manufacturers were frustrated in their initial attempts to obtain clear information from their supplier (the now shuttered Peanut Corporation of America) and translate that information into clearly defined messages for millions of confused consumers.
Operating as a stand-alone (and largely anonymous) company, PCA had its own operation to protect while the branded food companies bore the brunt of publicity – and the attendant costs of recalls – in their efforts to prevent damage to their own reputations.
In today’s complex global marketplace, with supply chains often stretching around the world, brand-name companies must now take their suppliers into account when preparing crisis communications plans. In some cases, those companies will have to coordinate and approve crisis plans for their suppliers so that implementation is swift, seamless, and efficient. Most important, suppliers must be made to feel accountable for protecting the brands that reassure consumers and drive business growth.
After all, a supply chain is only as strong as its weakest link.
This month's most popular post on Levick's...

What does the Wall Street Journal’s change in emphasis mean for the future of journalism? Richard Levick discusses the new paradigm of investigative journalism and who the journalistic heavyweights of the future will be.
Gene Grabowski breaks down the most recent food safety problem and looks at why Kraft’s proactive approach represents the gold standard of food safety communications.
Communications platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, and text messaging are playing a growing role in providing organizational assistance in planning for protests and demonstrations across the globe.
As newspapers endure ongoing budget cuts, slashed production schedules - or simply go out of business - David Bartlett looks at how e-readers may actually save the newspaper industry.
With the financial services industry facing a massive crisis of confidence, Richard Levick reminds us of the importance of being open and transparent with reporters and the public at large
Just Published
When news cycles are measured in minutes rather than hours, rapid responses to crisis are absolutely essential to winning the communications battles.To help ensure success in the Court of Public Opinion, Levick Strategic Communications presents the Crisis Communications Desktop Reference. It is a fully searchable, downloadable desktop resource covering more than two-dozen topics of urgent concern to business. It provides, with a click of the mouse, the strategic guidance you need at the moment a crisis strikes. Download the complementary Crisis Communications Desktop Reference today.
Making Your Point
Making Your Point, a new book by Levick Senior Vice President David Bartlett, examines the fundamental strategic considerations driving effective communication. It defines that key component called “emotional intelligence.” It provides the simple powerful tools to make a point in person, prepare and deliver effective speeches and presentations, get messages across in a media interview, and communicate during crises. Making Your Point is an easy-to-use communications guide for professionals and non-professionals alike. Order your copy today.
Stop the Presses: The Crisis and Litigation PR Desk Reference – now in its second edition – is a survival manual for corporate leaders, board members, lawyers, and communications specialists. This book provides the dos and don’ts of crisis planning and communications and articulates the essential strategic guidelines for navigating myriad bet-the-company issues. Order your copy today.
Future High Stakes™ issues
Labor and Employment:
Outsourcing jobs is the latest among many recent communications challenges for management – especially if newly elected politicians pursue their agendas.
Energy:
With a newly-empowered President and Congress looking to make good on its green promises, how can energy companies position themselves at the forefront of sustainability?
Patent & IP Litigation:
High-profile intellectual property cases threaten to sink stock prices. How can companies protect themselves in the wake of a negative ruling?
More to come:
- Antitrust
- Board or Board Member Liability
- Coming to America
- Diversity
- Education
- Executives Behind Bars
- Food
- Global Capital Markets
- Intellectual Property
- Internal Communications
- Internal Investigations
- Monetizing Moments
- Money Laundering/Money Transfers
- New Media/Social Networking
- Product Liability
- Professional Services Crises
- Public Equity
- Whistleblowers
- Reputation Management – Celebrity
- Reputation Management – Corruption
- Reputation Management – SEC Investigations
- Tourism
- Trade
Next month in High Stakes™: INTERNAL COMMUNICATIONS IN A HIGH-STAKES ENVIRONMENT