Sudan 1 scare proves food
industry is a risky business
Food Commodities & Ingredients
Group
Crisis Management: Scandal of
Sudan 1 and other dyes
News that various food products may have been contaminated
with the banned and potentially carcinogenic dye Sudan 1 in
February 2005 caused a global food scare and the recall of
hundreds of food products, with damaging consequences for
some of the manufacturers involved.
Taking into account this incident and those concerning other
banned, carcinogenic food dyes such as Para Red, the latest
‘Hot Topics’ meeting of the Food Commodities &
Ingredients Group was ‘hot’ in more ways than one.
Colin Doeg, author of Crisis Management in the Food Industry,
gave an insight into what it can be like to be on the inside
of such a crisis with his lecture ‘Crisis Management:
Scandal of Sudan 1 and other dyes’.
During his career Colin has been the media link for companies
such as the Brooke Bond Group and subsequently Brook Bond
Foods after it was taken over by Unilever. As such he was
paid, in his own words, ‘to be schizophrenic’; that
is to say he had to think with a journalistic instinct while
also representing a responsible food company. Tabloid journalism
aims to sell stories in as attractive and sensational a manner
as possible, but a company media manager aims to put matters
into a realistic perspective – preferably favourable
– from the company’s point of view.The central task
is to put complex technical matters into a form the media
will understand.The best person to do this is rarely, in fact,
a food scientist.
Colin outlined three ‘golden rules’ for circumstances
when the reputation of a food company may be at risk: the
company should be seen to put the interests of consumers first;
their actions should be perceived to be successful; they should
use brief statements in a language people can understand.
A good approach can be to explain the ‘real risk’
in terms people can relate to. For example, with the recent
Sudan 1 crisis it was several days before this statement from
a respected toxicologist appeared: ‘The risk is comparable
to a person smoking one cigarette during their lifetime contracting
lung cancer.’ Had it appeared earlier the public may
have been considerably less alarmed, and the companies involved
may also have benefited from the phenomenon that people tend
to believe what they read first – later denials are somehow
not as convincing.
If we consider the widespread use of ingredients in the food
industry today which come from global sources, the potential
for a rogue contaminant to find its way at microscopic levels
into a broad range of foods is quite alarming. Sadly it is
no longer enough to be ‘duly diligent’ or ‘operating
responsibly and within the realm of the law’. Damage
can be done by mass media coverage within hours and the innocent
can be victims.We have only to think of the UK brand Lea &
Perrins, which had nothing to do with the recent crisis but
was damaged by the fact that the public did not distinguish
their Worcester Sauce from the Premier Foods product that
was affected. Therefore an understanding of the workings of
the media and being prepared for the unthinkable really are
essential for modern food companies.
Colin passed on much sound advice about the
characteristics of a crisis and what preparations businesses
can make to deal with one. The bottom line is that despite
their best efforts of procedure and testing,food companies
are vulnerable.The Sudan 1 recall is estimated to have cost
over GB£143m in the UK and the ramifications of it have
echoed around the world.For those of us working in the food
industry we could do worse than pick up a copy of Colin’s
book – we may even save ourselves from a damaging incident.At
the very least we would be contributing to the ‘retirement
dream’ of a gentleman with a disarming and courteous
manner who entertained us for the evening and for a short
time made us ‘think schizophrenically’.
By Laurie Allanson, Chair, Food Commodities
& Ingredients Group
|
