Food Disparagement Law or “Veggie Libel Law” describes the new libel laws that impose penalties on anyone who comments about perishable food products in a manner deemed inconsistent with “reasonable or reliable scientific inquiry.” Food disparagement laws began cropping up in the early 1990’s, after a consumer scare over the pesticide Alar, a chemical used to lengthen the time that apples ripen on trees. In 1989, the CBD news program “60 Minutes” broadcast a report that said Alar could cause cancer. Washington State apple growers filed a defamation lawsuit, contending they lost $100 million in a consumer panic after the story aired. The suit, however, was dismissed on grounds that the alleged defamation was directed at a product, and that food could not be defamed. The controversy over Alar so unnerved farmers and other food producers that it prompted them to seek special protection for perishable foods. Alabama, Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota and Texas have adopted the so-called “veggie libel.” These laws put agriculture products on equal footing with other commodities, protecting them from false, negative claims. Name brand products are protected by libel trademark laws. Even individuals can protect themselves under libel and slander laws. But generic products, like fruits, vegetables, and meat don’t have that same protection under the law. The problem is made even more pronounced when those products are perishable. Producers can't store their products in a warehouse while they try and prove that negative claims are untrue. American Farm Bureau governmental relations specialist John Keeling has likened these false food claims to the 1st amendment equivalent of yelling “fire” in a crowded theater. The first case to test the new “veggie libel” laws w...
