Wednesday, September 24, 2014

Opponents of Measure 92 Begin Massive Misleading and Deceptive Ad Campaign

Opponents of Measure 92 Begin Massive Misleading and Deceptive Ad Campaign

Major Ad Buy Funded by Out-of-State Corporations Will Swamp Oregon Airwaves with Misinformation That Has Been Proved False Time and Again

Oregon- The No on 92 Coalition, funded almost entirely with money from out-of-state chemical conglomerates and big food companies, has begun their massive and misleading advertising campaign.

They’ve purchased millions of dollars worth of airtime between now and Election Day to air several ads making highly distorted, misleading and at times outright false claims, hoping to drown out the truth about Measure 92, Using the same cynical tactics they used in Washington and California in recent election years, the No on 92 Coalition is hoping to confuse enough voters to keep Measure 92 from passing.

In at least two ads that began airing today, the labeling opponents display a highly misleading graphic (see image below) that claims that Measure 92 specifically exempts many foods from labeling, like alcohol or meat and dairy. But the text of Measure 92 – particularly Sections 4 and 5, which the graphic cites as the source of the claim – contains no exemption language.

In the case of packaged foods, Measure 92 simply requires (Section 3, paragraphs 2,3) that foods that currently have labels under Oregon law add this additional information to those labels. Contrary to the ad’s claim, the measure creates no exemptions to existing labeling standards.

Read Sections 4 and 5 of Measure 92 here.


One 60-second advertisement from labeling opponents makes misleading claims about the Citizens Initiative Review Commission and it’s findings.

While the CIRC voted narrowly, 11 to 9, to oppose the measure, the Commission’s #1 key finding, accepted by the largest number of panel members, was that “labeling genetically engineered foods would provide information to let Oregonians make more informed buying decisions and this would offer them more control and transparency over their food purchasing decisions.”

Contrary to the ad’s claims, in their #2 key finding the CIRC panel rejected language that Measure 92 was full of “exemptions” and instead adopted the Yes on Measure 92 campaign’s proposed language that, “The labeling requirements do not apply to alcoholic beverages, or prepared restaurant food because they are currently outside the food labeling system laws.”

Moreover, the ad’s claim that products would have to be labeled as genetically engineered even if they do not contain genetically engineered ingredients is clearly false. Measure 92 requires that foods containing more than .9 percent genetically modified ingredients – an internationally accepted standard – be labeled. Three other states have passed labeling laws, and all use the same standard, as do most countries around the globe with labeling laws, including the European Union, Russia, Australia, New Zealand and many others.

Two other ads claim that family farmers would be hurt by Measure 92. In fact, farmers are explicitly protected from lawsuits. Contrary to the claim that this would require farmers to create expensive, separate agricultural systems, Measure 92 does not require any changes to the agricultural process. It doesn’t require any changes to what crops farmers grow, how they grow them, or how they distribute them.  All Measure 92 requires is a label.

Measure 92 has been endorsed by many farm-affiliated organizations, including: Friends of Family Farmers, the Our Family Farms Coalition, the Willamette Farm and Food Coalition, United Farm Workers, Oregon Tilth, the Phoenix Grange #779, the Rockford Grange #591, Mary’s River Grange #685, and scores of individual farms across the state.

No comments:

Post a Comment