False food labeling could harm brand reputation

The scandal involving the false labelling of food seems to be endless. It has spread from the hotel industry to restaurants and the food sections of department stores, among other businesses.

We are astonished by the lack of morals in these industries as a whole.

Black tiger shrimp was labelled “kuruma ebi” Japanese tiger prawn, ready-made juice in cartons was presented as “fresh juice” and Australian beef was called “Japanese beef,” to name a few examples of misrepresentation.

After the revelation of such cases, executives of hotels and department stores made such excuses as “We had little understanding of how precisely we should label (the products)” or “We didn’t check raw materials.”

There is no end to cases in which executives concerned do not admit they falsely labelled products, but insist the food items were “mistakenly labelled.” Clearly, they are simply trying to say they did not intentionally misrepresent products.

However, the Law against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations does not address whether an act was done intentionally or negligently in cases of “representations that may mislead consumers as to the quality of goods.”

It is illegal to deceive customers into believing that a consumer good is far better or more advantageous than it is in reality. We think the current series of false representations falls under this category.

Consumers deeply trust hotels and department stores. That is why they pay relatively high prices in exchange for high-quality services. These businesses should be keenly aware of the heavy responsibility they bear for deceiving consumers.

Among the various false representations, “restructured” meat was mislabeled as genuine “beef steak.” Restructured meat contains such ingredients as milk constituents, wheat and soybeans, all of which can cause allergic reactions in consumers. The menus did not explain that fact. Some hotels even served dishes without knowing what raw materials were contained in the food.

In the worst cases, food allergies can result in death. We are shocked by such sloppy behavior.

A ryokan Japanese-style inn in the city of Nara also served restructured meat to customers as Japanese beef. Ryokan staffers asked guests whether they had food allergies without telling them they would be served restructured meat. They then served the actual Japanese beef listed on the menu only to guests who had food allergies. There is no justification for such behavior.

The Consumer Affairs Agency, which has started an investigation into the false-labelling cases, this week asked industry organizations of hotels and department stores to compile and submit reports to the agency one month from now on their efforts to appropriately represent food on menus and in other situations. These entire industries must respond sincerely to the situation.

One factor behind the endless false representations is a lack of knowledge among those involved in the industries. The Consumer Affairs Agency has issued a guidebook to the industries describing concrete examples of violations of the law against misleading representations and what constitutes misleading representations, and asked them to improve the situation. It is important to make every person working in the industries thoroughly aware of the rules regarding representation.

The government will hold an emergency meeting of ministries and agencies related to the matter at the beginning of the week.

If the current fiasco is prolonged, business opportunities such as year-end sales are likely to be adversely affected. Such a situation may also harm the credibility of “Japan brand” products and services, which are praised by foreign countries and tourists for their safety and security.

Administrative instructions by the government are necessary, but what is primarily required is that all food-related industries change their behavior and make efforts to regain the trust of consumers.

Editorial

(The Yomiuri Shimbun)

(Asia News Network)