Jolley: Prime time slime time anytime at AMI Conference

Chuck Jolley  |  Updated: 05/04/2012

 Resize text        

Following on the downtrodden heels of the recent pink slimegate, perpetrated by people like publicity hawk Jamie Oliver and ABC News short stroker Jim Avila, the American Meat Institute staged a quickly scheduled Lean, Finely Textured Beef (LFTB) Summit at their 2012 Expo in Dallas this week. 

Even with the short time frame, they managed to pull together some all star panelists:  Ron Plain, D. Howard Doane Professor of Agricultural Economics and Extension Economist with the University of Missouri College of Agriculture, Food and Natural Resources; Jim Dickson, a professor with the Iowa State University Department of Animal Science, and Robert Hibbert, partner in the Washington, D.C. law firm K&L Gates.  Panel moderator Janet Riley, AMI's vice president of public affairs, kept those three gentlemen focused and on task.

Pointing out the painful truth that sometimes science accounts for naught, Plain said, “Once 90% of consumers think of it as pink slime, you've lost.”

Dickson took a different fork in the road and suggested consumers should be educated about the safety of the product, instead.

Plain-spoken Dr. Plain underscored his point.  The LFTB battle was lost on the battlefield of public opinion before BPI and the industry could muster its defense forces.  Therein was the problem.  The media – classic outlets like the New York Times and ABC News as well as internet upstarts like Huffpost and the Lunchtray’s Bettina Elias Siegel - were attacking with a ‘Department of War’ mentality.  The meat industry reacted with a ‘Department of Defense’ strategy and were late in marshalling their forces.

Hibbert said traditional media are no longer thought leaders; they follow social media's trends.  Fact checking and honest investigative reporting have fallen by the wayside due to staffing reductions and budget constraints.  USA Today, for instance, is cost cutting by placing their reporting staff on week-long, unpaid furloughs, effectively losing the expertise of some of their best and brightest when critical stories might break.

The heavily defensive and scientifically driven meat industry shelling of false media reports had little effect against the blitzkrieg attack for Avila, Oliver, and others who had already created fear-driven public opinion.  The facts and the expert testimony were overpowered by an “I read something by somebody on the internet so it must be true and your expert is just a paid lackey of big meat” reaction.

Ms. Riley talked about the ‘sexiness’ of the pink slime term and how it stood little chance against the more correct lean, finely textured beef.  Pink slime makes a dandy headline, LFTB is a snoozer.

So what have we learned from this?

1.  The real power in shaping public opinion is social media.  #pinkslime is to be feared.  And if you don’t understand what #pinkslime means, you’ve already lost the first battle.

2.  The news cycle, which used to be driven by print and electronic media (TV network news), and could be measured in hours if not days, is now driven by the new electronic media (think Facebook and Twitter) and that news cycle is measured in minutes.

3.  Those well-schooled ‘experts’ of the past have very little power and influence; fear the Bettina Elias Siegels of the world, instead.  Scientific credentials or years of hands on experience are no longer primary qualifications for being an expert witness.

4. What the industry sees as perfectly harmless, a cleverly manipulated public can interpret as disgusting and the evil practice of big business only in it for excessive profit.

And what must we do with this new found knowledge?

1. Realize that the only way to stay on top of trending issues is to hashtag them.  And if you still don’t understand what that means, you’ve already lost the second battle.

2.  Forget newspapers and television, they are beginning to accept their role as catch-up players on most important news.  Be ready to respond within minutes or hours to trending issues.

3.  Spend less time with the experts and more time with the shapers of public opinion.  Why didn’t the AMI ask Jamie Oliver and Bettina Siegel Gregory to join the panelists?  Understanding what drives the builders of public opinion is much more important than anything said by the panelists.

4. Begin immediately to review all your production practices with an eye toward the ‘yuck factor’ that powered the pink slime story.  What are you doing that would be better explained by you than PETA, HSUS, Foodtray or Jim Avila? 

Hint #1: the next big thing in the online news cycle looks like ‘meat glue?’

Hint #2: Rumor has it that Avila’s pink slime story earned him a permanent assignment to the Washington food beat.  If that’s true, you’ll be hearing from him a lot more often.  He’s already helped derail the new HIMP program.

Chuck Jolley is a free lance writer, based in Kansas City, who covers a wide range of ag industry topics for Vance Publishing.
Prev 1 2 Next All


Comments (6) Leave a comment 

Name
e-Mail (required)
Location

Comment:

characters left

Tom    
Mn  |  May, 05, 2012 at 07:30 AM

In reading jolley's excerpt LFTB summit, the media out did the industry again. facebook, twitter etc seem to be the most accepted media now days. With that said CBB, NCBA, USCA and the industry might step back and review issues management protocol. We have to remember todays younger generation does not watch the news or read the paper. We learned that when Obama was elected he used social media. Most of them can't find a job 4years later but he still connected and was elected.

Gail Beggs    
Ohio  |  May, 06, 2012 at 05:00 PM

I can't believe the Industry is still trying to send defend this stuff. If your local locker plant that processes the animal that will end up in your freezer told you they had saved all the LFTB (anhydrous ammonia and more) they could and had mixed it into your hamburger what would you do? I don't know a producer who wouldn't change locker plants. You expect this kind of stuff in Hot Dogs or Brats but, not in hamburger.

George from UC    
California  |  May, 06, 2012 at 05:20 PM

Read "The Perfect Storm: How the Pink Slime Debacle Created Food System Change" at http://nyshepa.blogspot.com (especially points 3 and 8) to be better prepared next time.
You are completely right that the panel was lopsided and would have benefited from the opposite point of view.
I would add a fifth point to "what have we learned from this?"
5. The consumer does not like being lied to.
And to "what must we do with this new found knowledge?"
5.Trust the consumer with the truth from the beginning.

keith Warriner    
Guelph, Canada  |  May, 06, 2012 at 09:21 PM

One of my concerns about the commentary surrounding LFTB is that the consumer are considered a herd of sheep that blindly follow what is written on the internet or posted in social media. The issues surrounding LFTB were being debated in the 1990’s and then into the 2000’s but the big difference in 2012 is that the major food service and retail chains instantly reacted to public opinion rather than go through the challenging route of educating consumers. I think it wasent so much the “yuk” factor but thought that consumers had been deceived. The message coming from industry and government when the uproar began was all focused on how safe the product was but this was not the real issue. A more effective campaign would have been that the LFTB is essentially a method of maximizing the recovery of meat from a carcass. The removal of LFTB from ground beef would equate to 1.5 million cattle and increased imports from Australia and New Zealand who produce the learner carcasses required for production of low fat ground beef. The economic loss of beef producers in the US would see farms closure with negative consequences to farming communities. As for the deception aspect, the industry should have put their hands up and apologize to the consumers and ensure products will be labeled in future. One could argue that social media adds oxygen to fire but it can also be used as an effective route to getting a message across provided it is delivered in the right context.

Maxine    
SD  |  May, 07, 2012 at 04:44 PM

In my rancher mindframe, this is clearly an attack on a business (BPI) who invented and uses a process to make a superior beef product from beef muscle too costly to salvage from the fatty trim of steaks and roasts by conventional means. Reasons could be from envy and desire to steal that process, to ignorance and a belief that 'evil meat packers' are getting rich off 'the other guy'. ''

Perpetrators in that scenario range from other packers to farmers who want to somehow 'justify' their costly 'natural', or 'organic' production methods, to people believing eating animals is evil.

In my 'mom/grandma/consumer' mode I want that lean product saved from the 'fat disposal' barrel at the packin plant to replace imported very lean beef that would be needed to add to our grain fed hamburger meat to bring down the fat content, AND the PRICE of hamburger. I CERTAINLY want the added safety of the spray to kill any bacteria floating around in that plant.

As one of the ORIGINAL ENVIRONMENTALISTS, (rancher) I want the benefit of getting all the meat a carcass can produce.

As one who despises the practice of using false information to harm others' businesses, I certainly want an investigation of the smear against BPI and LFTB, and punishment of the perpetrators.

As a US citizen, I fear for our country if the consumers are so foolish and ignorant as to believe this attack on a fine food product. Further, it is a great concern that perceptions prevail over facts and people are so easily led by those promoting damaging actions by using those false perceptions to harm producers of certain foods.

Bobbi    
Ne  |  June, 13, 2012 at 02:32 PM

Gail - As a farmer/rancher I would love for my local packer to use LFTB when I take our yearly hand raised steer in to be processed for the freezer. I will buy and support any ground beef product containing LFTB over ground beef product free of LFTB. Not because it is cheaper but because it utilizes and additional 10-20 lbs of beef per carcass and it is the right thing to do to utilize as much of the animal as possible. The sterilization process is used in many other food products including processed foods, fruits and veggies to reduce the risk of bacterial contamination. So you might as well stop buying those products too. If consumers continue to be the sheep that Keith spoke about they will not be purchasing any foods at the store, they will have to quit their jobs and focus their lives on making their own food in their backyards and porches. People have been eating the LFTB for 30 years and there are no reported cases of illness or death caused by it's consumption that I can find.


Feedback Form
Leads to Insight