THE meaningless descriptions on food labels, like ''country style'', and misleading use of words, like ''fresh'' and ''traditional'', have been condemned in a new report.
Pictures also have come under attack, and there will likely be a crackdown on cosy kitchen and countryside scenes.
The report follows a two-year study by the Food Advisory Committee and is intended to help prevent the public being fooled by food manufacturers' marketing departments.
''I think this report emphasises and crystallises what many of us thought - that some marketing departments are awfully close to telling porkies,'' said Michael Gibson, a member of the Food Standards Agency board and deputy chairman of the Scottish Food Advisory Committee.
The report says labellers, in applying the law, have a tendency to be economical with the truth. They gloss over the ingredients and processes of the food manufacturing industry and terms like ''traditional'' and ''natural'' are misused to imply parallels with home cooking, using home products or at least those that can readily be bought to prepare the product at home.
''We know from surveys that significant numbers of people feel confused about labels,'' said Mr Gibson. ''They often reflect the aspirations of the marketing department rather than being a truthful representation of the production and contents of food. Public concern now extends beyond the label of what is in food to the production method used, especially if colourings are going to be used to colour egg yolks or farmed fish.
''Pictures for the first time have had their importance acknowledged, and the report says they play a key role, often being more powerful than words. Nobody depicts hens in battery cages, the hens are all pictured in the fields, although the more humorous ones we can overlook because we don't really believe that dairy cows play football if they come from New Zealand.
''Spurious words such as 'country style' are recommended for the bin and others such as 'traditional' will require substantiation.''
The recommendations are, after consultation, expected to become guidelines and make enforcement of existing legislation by local authorities easier.
The committee studied terms like ''fresh'', ''pure'', ''traditional'', ''farmhouse'', ''natural'', ''original'', ''authentic'' and ''home made''. It recommended pictures should be subject to exactly the same scrutiny and control. No longer will cosy kitchen images be permitted on food produced in a factory. The report says pictures can be more powerful and evocative than words so care must be taken to ensure background illustrations and pictorial material do not mislead.
''For example, country scenes may lead the consumer to believe that animal products have been obtained from extensively reared, free-range animals. Kitchen scenes may lead a consumer to believe a product is hand-made or at least produced in a small scale operation.''
''One of the agency's key priorities for the next five years is to promote honest and informative labelling for the benefit of consumers,'' said Mr Gibson, adding: ''People have a right to clear and meaningful labels so that they know what they are really buying.''
True meaning of all the terms
FRESH
l Often has no real meaning. On frozen food, context should be clear, eg ''frozen from fresh''.
NATURAL
l Should not be used to describe foods or ingredients which employ chemicals.
PURE
l Should describe a single-ingredient food to which nothing has been added.
TRADITIONAL
l A recipe or process that has existed for a significant amount of time.
ORIGINAL
l The product should not have changed to any material degree.
AUTHENTIC
l For the geographic origin of a product, such as ''authentic Devon toffee''.
HOME-MADE
l Its use should be restricted to the preparation of a recipe of something manufactured on the premises.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article