Samantha  Cobb  Agriculture  Policy  Fall  2011  

FOOD  SAFETY  PORTFOLIO  

Table  of  Contents  

PREFACE ........................................................................................................................................................1  

NEWS  RELEASE...........................................................................................................................................2  

GHOST  LETTER ...........................................................................................................................................4  

BACKGROUNDER........................................................................................................................................5  

Q&A...................................................................................................................................................................6  

BLOG  ENTRY.................................................................................................................................................7  

FACT  SHEET..................................................................................................................................................8  

 

   

PREFACE    

Within  this  portfolio  lie  numerous  samples  of  public  relations  writing  focusing  on  food  safety  policies  in  the  United  States  and  abroad.  The  specific  writing  examples  in  this  portfolio  include:  a  press  release,  ghost  letter,  fact  sheet,  Q&A,  blog  entry  and  a  backgrounder.  The  samples  offer  a  range  of  topics  related  to  food  safety.  I  invite  you  to  sit  back,  relax  and  take  a  few  moments  to  review.  

As  you  can  see,  the  following  pages  offer  a  variety  of  pieces  showing  diversity  and  depth  in  my  writing.  Striving  to  be  a  well-­‐rounded  person,  special  attention  was  paid  to  each  piece.  Granted,  some  were  more  challenging  than  others,  but  I  enjoyed  the  opportunity  to  flex  my  writing  ability  while  learning  more  with  each  piece.  In  the  end,  I  hope  that  my  writing  scope  and  style  become  apparent  and  that  my  proficiency  in  the  field  of  public  relations  is  ascertained.  

Through  the  creation  of  this  portfolio,  as  well  as  my  time  spent  in  college,  I  have  learned  that  public  relations  writers  must  think  outside  the  box  to  create  messages  that  touch  the  intended  audience  in  a  unique  way.  This  is  especially  vital  to  professionals  in  agriculture.  In  a  society  with  immense  amounts  of  noise,  in  the  form  of  advertisements,  radio,  television,  print  and  more,  the  creation  of  strategic  messaging  that  not  only  rings  above  the  noise,  but  also  achieves  the  desired  goal,  is  imperative.  Being  in  the  agriculture  field  is  more  challenging  on  this  front.  Not  only  is  it  important  to  reach  consumers,  but  also  to  combat  the  negative  stigma  and  misinformation  that  other  groups  disseminate.    

I  have  also  learned  that  listening  is  twice  as  important  as  talking.  My  mother  repeatedly  told  me  growing  up  that  we  have  two  ears  and  one  mouth  for  a  reason.  I  finally  had  to  admit  that  she  was  right.  In  public  relations  communications,  even  the  most  talented  writers  can  miss  the  mark  without  listening  skills.  In  order  to  produce  the  desired  message,  one  must  have  the  ability  to  listen  and  incorporate  the  ideals  of  the  client  while  keeping  the  overall  goal  of  the  project  in  mind.  I  have  paid  special  attention  to  both  of  these  areas  and  have  learned  to  dial  into  the  needs  of  various  audiences  in  order  to  create  appropriate  messages  catered  to  their  interests  and  needs.  I  have  also  attended  workshops  on  effective  listening  skills  to  learn  how  to  listen  with  my  body  language  as  well  as  my  ears  to  absorb  the  entire  message.  This  skill,  combined  with  clear  note  taking  and  strategic  questioning,  allows  me  to  listen  and  communicate  effectively.    

Finally,  I  would  like  to  extend  my  sincere  gratitude  to  you  for  taking  an  interest  in  my  portfolio.  It  means  a  great  deal  to  me  that  you  have  taken  the  time  to  review  my  writing  samples.  With  this  being  the  beginning  of  my  career,  I  am  fully  aware  that  I  am  not  perfect  and  therefore  welcome  your  advice  and  suggestions.  I  promise  that  I  will  take  all  critiques  to  heart  in  an  effort  to  change  my  writing  for  the  better.  I  firmly  believe  in  continuous  learning  and  forward  progression  and  make  a  point  to  give  all  endeavors  my  personal  best  and  this  portfolio  is  no  different.  I  sincerely  hope  that  you  enjoy  this  work  and  come  to  consider  me  a  valuable  young  asset  to  the  agriculture  public  relations  field.  Again,  thank  you  for  your  time.    

NEWS    

Middle  Tennessee  State  University  1301  E.  Main  St.  Murfreesboro,  TN  37130  

FOR  IMMEDIATE  RELEASE  Contact:  Samantha  Cobb       931-­‐993-­‐7996       sam.cobb.m@gmail.com    

AMERICANS  THINK  FOOD  SUPPLY  IS  UNSAFE    

MURFREESBORO,  Tenn.  –Nov  30,  2011–  More  than  half  of  the  American  population  is  not  

confident  in  the  safety  of  our  food  supply  according  to  the  International  Food  Information  

Council  Survey  released  in  July  2010.  

  While  47  percent  are  confident  in  the  food  supply,  35  are  neither  confident  nor  

unconfident  and  18  percent  are  not  confident.  With  77  percent  of  Americans  indicating  that  

they  believe  it  is  the  government’s  responsibility  to  ensure  food  safety.  

  The  survey  questioned  Americans  in  the  areas  of  health,  weight,  caffeine,  food  

additives,  food  safety,  food  handling,  purchasing  influences  and  food  labeling.    

  Results  show  that  the  majority  of  the  population  is  attempting  to  lose  weight  by  

either  changing  the  amount  or  types  of  food  they  eat.  Americans  are  more  focused  on  

consuming  caffeine  in  moderation.  The  Nutrition  Facts  label  is  utilized  by  most  of  the  

population.  An  overwhelming  88  percent  of  respondents  purchase  their  food  in  grocery  

stores  or  supermarkets  leaving  the  survey  writers  to  assume  that  the  other  12  percent  shop  

at  farmers  markets,  food  stands  or  grow  their  own.    

  The  IFICF  press  release  said,  “This  survey  offers  the  important  voice  and  insights  of  

the  consumer  for  the  health  professionals,  government  officials,  educators,  and  other  

interested  individuals  who  seek  to  improve  the  lives  of  Americans.”    

####  

Curran, Laurel. "Food Safety News: Breaking news for everyone's consumption." 23 July 2010. Survey Shows Consumer Attitudes Toward Food. 30 Novemner 2011 <http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2010/07/food-safety-health-survey-sheds-light-on-opinion-of-american-consumer/>.  

November  23,  2011    To  the  Agriculture  Community:    Today,  I  announce  a  major  change  in  the  present  and  future  of  food  safety  in  the  United  States.  Currently,  each  year  48  million  Americans  are  affected  by  forborne  illness.  Hundreds  and  thousands  are  hospitalized  and  killed.  Congress  and  the  President  have  heard  our  voice  and  are  making  a  change  that  will  use  science  and  security  to  keep  our  food  supply  safe      The  Food  Safety  Modernization  Act  gives  new  responsibilities  to  the  FDA.  Put  simply,  the  act  takes  a  comprehensive  look  at  the  U.S.  food  system  and  the  responsibilities  of  its  participants  and  strengthens  accountability  and  prevention  both  domestically  and  internationally.    Primarily,  the  FDA  will  have  more  power  in  enforcing  safety  plans  in  food  processing  plans.  These  plans  will  come  from  the  food  processor.  They  will  have  the  opportunity  to  evaluate  the  hazards  in  their  operation  and  implement  measures  to  prevent  contamination  and  have  a  plan  in  the  unfortunate  event  that  corrective  action  needs  to  be  taken.      The  FDA  will  also  use  science  to  create  standards  for  safe  production,  harvesting  and  transportation  of  product  to  minimize  health  risk  and  maximize  safety.  They  will  also  develop  standards  for  inspecting  processing  facilities  and  carry  out  those  inspections.  In  the  first  five  years  the  act  is  in  place  all  facilities  must  be  inspected.  Thereafter,  the  facilities  will  be  inspected  a  minimum  of  every  three  years.      Imports  and  exports  from  the  United  States  will  be  more  heavily  regulated  and  controlled  by  the  FDA.  Exporting  countries  will  be  required  to  prove  the  safety  of  the  food  from  their  suppliers  and  the  FDA  will  reserve  the  right  to  block  suppliers  who  refuse  to  do  so.  Foreign  agencies  will  be  working  with  the  FDA  to  initiate  the  inspection  of  foreign  food  production  facilities.      Now,  the  responsibility  falls  on  the  FDA  to  implement  the  tasks  assigned  to  them.  Currently,  we  are  working  on  how  to  put  this  law  into  effect  and  make  our  food  supply  safer  for  our  families  and  fellow  Americans.  This  law  represents  a  large  change  for  food  safety  in  America  with  the  focus  on  prevention  and  sound  science.  I  look  to  the  current  advocates  of  our  industry  for  support  and  aid  for  this  act.        Sincerely,          Margaret  A.  Hamburg  M.D.    Commissioner  of  Food  and  Drugs      Hamburg, Margaret A. "Food Safety Modernization Act: Putting the Focus on Prevention." 03 January 2011. The White House Blog. 23 November 2011 <http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/01/03/food-safety-modernization-act-putting-focus-prevention>.

BACKGROUNDER-­  The  Proposed  Trade  Agreement  Between  the  U.S.  and  South  Korea  (KORUS  FTA)  

Description     The  proposed  trade  agreement  between  the  U.S.  and  South  Korea  was  signed  June  30,  2007.  It  is  one  of  the  largest  trade  agreements  both  countries  have  entered  into.  Both  countries  rank  in  the  top  ten  trading  partners  with  the  other  country.  The  agreement  cannot  be  acted  upon  until  legislation  is  written  by  Congress  to  approve  implementation.    

KORUS  FTA  and  the  Bush  Administration     The  agreement  could  already  be  implemented  but  the  legislation  has  not  been  written  by  Congress.  The  President  has  the  option  to  submit  legislation  but  President  Bush  never  did.  He  made  this  decision  based  on  the  differences  between  the  leadership  and  negotiations  of  beef  and  automobiles.    

KORUS  FTA  and  the  Obama  Administration     President  Obama  and  President  Lee  met  on  December  3,  2010  and  announced  that  they  had  reached  an  agreement.  After  a  series  of  letters  and  other  negotiations  some  modifications  were  made  to  the  agreement  passed  in  2007.  Agreements  were  reached  in  the  areas  of  tariffs  and  automobiles.  The  biggest  unresolved  issue  is  full  U.S.  beef  access  due  to  its  political  sensitivity  in  South  Korea.  However,  the  Obama  administration  has  claimed  to  re-­‐approach  the  issue  when  the  agreement  goes  into  effect.  

Committee  Meetings     Earlier  this  year  the  House  Ways  and  Means  Committee  and  the  Senate  Finance  Committee  began  preliminary  drafts  of  the  implementation  bills  doe  KORUS  FTA.  The  amendments  made  by  these  committees  are  not  binding  to  the  copy  that  the  President  signs.  Both  committees  read  and  approved  different  preliminary  drafts  of  the  bill.    Contact:   Samantha  Cobb         555-­‐555-­‐555       sam.cobb.m@gmail.com  

 Cooper, WIlliam H,. Manyin, Mark E., Jurenas, Remy, Platzer, Michaela D. "The Proposed U.S.-South Korea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS FTA): Provisions and Implications." 9 August 2011. Congressional Research Service. 23 November 2011 <http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL34330.pdf>.  

Q&A-­  Export  Requirements  for  People’s  Republic  of  China    The  following  questions  and  answers  have  been  collected  pertaining  the  export  requirements  for  China  as  of  October  18,  2011  from  the  Food  Safety  and  Inspection  Service.    Q:  What  products  will  China  not  allow  from  the  U.S.  A:  China  will  not  allow  beef,  beef  products,  tallow,  sheep  meat,  lamb  meat,  sheep/lamb  castings  not  intended  for  processing,  poultry  feet  produced  according  to  the  “Hong  Kong”  standard  and  specific  state  restrictions  apply  to  Kentucky,  Virginia,  Arkansas,  Idaho,  Pennsylvania,  Texas  and  Minnesota.    Q:  Which  products  are  eligible  for  export  to  China?  A:  The  following  products  are  allowed  for  export  to  China:  poultry,  poultry  products,  sheep/lamb  castings  intended  for  processing,  pork  and  pork  products.    Q:  What  is  required  on  the  exterior  label  of  products  exported  to  China?  A:  There  are  twelve  elements  that  must  appear  on  an  exterior  label  when  exporting  a  product  to  China:  Product  name,  country  of  origin,  establishment  number,  production  date,  expiration  date  or  storage  period,  storage  temperature,  country  of  destination,  net  weight,  inspection  legend,  name  and  address  of  company,  production  Lot  number  and  other  specification  for  the  specific  type  of  package.      Q:  Can  products  be  rejected?  If  so,  why?  A:  Yes,  products  can  be  rejected  even  if  they  fit  all  of  the  previously  stated  items.  If  inconsistencies  exist  between  U.S.  and  Chinese  in  regards  to  the  residue  and  microbial  standards  for  the  product  it  can  be  rejected.      Q:  Is  there  a  way  labeling  should  be  worded?  A:  Yes,  there  are  specific  statements  for  products  intended  for  re-­‐export  to  Japan,  export  of  pork  and  poultry.  For  additional  information  on  this  matter  please  refer  to  the  USDA’s  website  for  the  Food  Safety  and  Inspection  Service.  

  United States Department of Agriculture. Food Safety and Inspection Service. 28 October 2011. 22 November 2011 <http://www.fsis.usda.gov/regulations/China_Requirements/index.asp>.

Food  Safety-­  Myth  or  Fact    Today  I  want  to  talk  about  a  topic  that  we,  as  Americans,  all  hold  dear  to  our  hearts,  food  safety.  It  is  something  we  commonly  find  in  magazines  and  hear  about  in  the  news.  However,  there  is  a  lot  of  misinformation  presented  to  us  by  the  media.  Today  I  seek  to  debunk  the  two  most  common  myths  about  food  safety  in  the  United  States  concerning  safety  of  fresh  produce.  This  information  comes  from  the  Agricultural  and  Applied  Economics  Association.    Myth:  Food  safety  standards  are  mandated  by  the  government.  Fact:  There  are  two  types  of  food  safety  standards,  private  and  public.  Private  standards  are  can  be  set  up  by  one  or  many  firms.  Public  standards  are  brought  about  by  a  rule  making  process  and  usually  legislated.  Since  private  standards  are  voluntarily  made  they  are  not  binding  outside  of  the  firms  they  pertain  to.  Private  firms  often  mandate  their  own  safety  standards  in  order  to  make  their  products  safer  for  the  consumer  and  also  to  have  standing  SOPs  in  their  business.      Myth:  Food  safety  is  singularly  regulated  by  the  FDA.  Fact:  Food  safety  is  regulated  by  the  FDA,  but  it  is  also  regulated  by  the  USDA,  CDC,  EPA  and  Department  of  Homeland  Security.  USDA’s  inspections  are  performed  on  a  mandatory  basis  and  embody  a  number  of  actions.  According  to  the  AAEA  website,  “USDA’s  food  safety  responsibilities  center  on  meat,  poultry,  and  processed  egg  products  inspection,  certification  of  safe  process  practices  in  production  and  marketing,  controlling  plant  and  animal  diseases  that  affect  safety,  and  generating  technological  progress  in  dealing  with  food  safety  and  disease  issues.”  The  FDA’s  responsibilities  center  on  processed  foods  and  fresh  produce  but  lack  the  force  of  mandatory  action.  The  organization  is  similar  to  the  FCC  of  the  recording  industry.  They  put  out  guides  and  suggest  best  practices  but  cannot  require  producers  to  take  action.  Unlike  the  FCC  they  cannot  impose  an  injunction  or  recall.  The  CDC  is  responsible  for  identifying  the  source  of  microbial  contamination  of  the  food  supply.  Finally,  the  DHS,  in  coordination  with  other  governmental  agencies  regulated  food  safety  of  products  being  imported  into  the  country.  Most  of  these  governmental  bodies  partner  with  state  agencies  as  well.  Thus,  proving  that  a  significant  amount  of  time,  manpower  and  energy  is  behind  the  safety  of  our  food  supply.    For  more  information  on  this  subject  the  link  for  the  article  is  below:  http://www.aaea.org/publications/policy-­‐issues/PI8.pdf          

Palma,  Marco  A.,  et  al.  Food  Safety  Standards  for  the  U.S.  Fresh  Produce  Industry.  May  2010.  27  November  2011  <http://www.aaea.org/publications/policy-­‐issues/PI8.pdf>.      

FACT  SHEET  –  Meat  and  Poultry  Labeling  in  the  U.S.    

 Certified:     This  term  indicates  that  the  USDA’s  Food  Safety  and  Inspection  

Service  and  the  Agriculture  Marketing  Service  have  evaluated  the  meat  on  the  basis  of  class,  grade  and  other  quality  characteristics.  If  the  meat  has  been  inspected  and  evaluated  on  the  merits  of  another  organization  it  will  be  indicated  on  the  packaging.  

Chemical  Free:  

  Not  allowed  on  a  label  

           Free  Range:  

  Animals  proven  to  have  been  raised  with  access  to  the  outside.  

Organic:     Indicates  that  the  product  has  been  produced  using  approved  methods.  These  methods  may  not  include:  synthetic  fertilizers,  sewage  sludge,  irradiation  and  genetic  engineering.  Approved  methods  are  those  that  foster  the  cycling  of  resources  and  promote  ecological  balance.  

Fresh  Poultry:  

  Meat  that  is  consistent  with  the  consumer  perception  of  non-­‐frozen  meat.  It  encompasses  whole  cuts  that  have  never  been  below  26oF  which  is  the  temperature  at  which  the  meat  would  freeze.  

Natural:      A  minimally  processed  product  containing  no  artificial  ingredient  or  added  color.  Minimally  processed  indicates  that  the  meat  has  not  undergone  handling  that  fundamentally  alters  the  product.  On  the  package  itself  term  natural  should  be  defined.  

No  Hormones:  

  Pork  or  poultry-­‐  since  hormones  are  not  allowed  in  the  productions  of  these  products  the  label  cannot  be  used.  In  the  case  that  the  label  states  that  the  use  of  hormones  is  prohibited  therefore  the  product  does  not  contain  hormones  it  is  acceptable.  Beef:  The  labeling  can  be  approved  if  the  producer  proves  to  the  Agency  that  hormones  were  not  used  in  raising  the  animals.  

Investigation:     The  National  Transportation  and  Safety  Board  mobilized  more  than  100  investigators  to  work  with  local  authorities  to  investigate  the  incident.  The  FBI  also  had  investigators  on  site.  

Contact:     Samantha  Cobb  (931)  993-­‐7996  sam.cobb.m@gmail.com  

November  21,  2011  

United States Department of Agriculture. Agricultural Marketing Service. 27 October 2011. 22 November 2011 <http://www.ams.usda.gov/AMSv1.0/ams.fetchTemplateData.do?template=TemplateC&navID=NationalOrganicProgram&leftNav=NationalOrganicProgram&page=NOPConsumers&description=Consumers&acct=nopgeninfo>. —. Food and Safety Inspection Aervice. 12 April 2011. 22 November 2011 <http://www.fsis.usda.gov/factsheets/Meat_&_Poultry_Labeling_Terms/index.asp>.