Online from publication. 4 pages., Introduction of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's proposed rule, called "Requirements for additional traceability records for certain foods." Reporter notes, "The industry has been waiting for this shoe to drop for years."
20 pages., Online via UI e-subscription, This article centered on the representation of food additives as a matter of key importance to the public's conceptualization of them. Findings from a systematic qualitative study of the magazines of two Belgian consumer organizations revealed that additives were seen as providing no benefits to consumers, for they could be used to reduce the quality of both the ingredients and the production process. They were perceived as a means of deceiving the public, with portrayal of consumers as powerless in the struggle for control over the types and amounts of additives they ingested. In turn, the limitations were seen as a failure of government and scientific institutions to provide the necessary protection.
Austin, Lucinda L. (author / University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill), Schultz, MaryClaire (author / Elon University), and Gaither, Barbara Miller (author / Elon University)
Format:
Book chapter
Publication Date:
2019
Published:
International
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 102 Document Number: D10898
Notes:
See also D10895., Pages 95-103 in Brigitta R. Brunner and Corey A. Hickerson (editors), Cases in public relations: translating ethics into action. Oxford University Press, New York City, New York. 359 pages., Reports on goals of McDonald's to increase transparency with consumers. While their goals are clear, their actions fall short."
International: Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 30 Document Number: D10565
Notes:
4 pages., via website, The Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy., As Congress and the public debate the pros and cons of the United States-Mexico-Canada
Agreement (USMCA), or New NAFTA, behind the scenes and in the shadows transnational
corporations are doubling down on their plans to weaken and eliminate public protections
through a related entity, the secretive Regulatory Cooperation Council (RCC). This littleknown council has the mission of promoting trade by “reducing, eliminating or preventing
unnecessary regulatory differences” between Canada and the United States. Since the RCC’s
inception, agribusiness—including factory-farmed livestock producers, the feed industry, and
chemical and pesticide manufacturers and linked transportation businesses—has had a seat at
the regulatory cooperation table. Their focus, without exception, has been advocating the
scaling back and even elimination of important safety protections in both countries. In the U.S.,
recommendations made by the RCC feed directly into regulations enacted (or eliminated) by
the Department of Agriculture, Food and Drug Administration and Environmental Protection
Agency, among others
