ARTICLE
30 September 2019

Ad Board Recommends Change To Animal Welfare Claim

SH
Shook, Hardy & Bacon

Contributor

Shook, Hardy & Bacon has long been recognized as one of the premier litigation firms in the country. For more than a century, the firm has defended companies in their most substantial national and international products liability, mass tort and complex litigation matters.

The firm has leveraged its complex product liability litigation expertise to expand into several other practice areas and advance its mission of “being the best in the world at providing creative and practical solutions at unsurpassed value.” As a result, the firm has built nationally recognized practices in areas such as intellectual property, environmental and toxic tort, employment litigation, commercial litigation, government enforcement and compliance, and public policy.

The National Advertising Division (NAD) has recommended that Clemens Food Group and its flagship brand, Hatfield Quality Meats, "discontinue the claim ‘Ethically Raised
United States Media, Telecoms, IT, Entertainment

The National Advertising Division (NAD) has recommended that Clemens Food Group and its flagship brand, Hatfield Quality Meats, “discontinue the claim ‘Ethically Raised by Family Farmers Committed to a Higher Standard of Care, Governed by Third Party Animal Welfare Audits.'” NAD acknowledged that the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) reviewed the claim, but the “record here did not demonstrate that FSIS considered consumer impact or that it explained its reasoning with respect to its determination on the ‘ethically raised’ claim. Accordingly, NAD undertook its own review of the challenged claims."

The challenger, Animal Welfare Institute (AWI), argued that the claim misled “a high percentage” of consumers “because they took the claim to mean that the animals’ treatment and living conditions exceed industry standards.” NAD noted that AWI provided a consumer perception survey, and the board found the survey to be methodologically sound. Hatfield submitted “caretaker standards, third-party auditing and related practices, and its relationship with animal welfare expert, Dr. Temple Grandin who helped to develop Hatfield’s sow houses and processing facilities."

NAD “concluded that this support is not sufficient to substantiate the claim at issue because the practices cited by Hatfield as innovative are not directly relevant to any third-party auditing program as stated in the challenged claim.” Although the ad board was “encouraged by Hatfield’s commitment to continue implementing animal welfare practices in the future,” it ruled that “these aspirational programs were not sufficient to support the challenged claim for Hatfield’s commercially-available products.”

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More