ABC News May Have to Pay Billions of Dollars Because of “Pink Slime”

But the food industry brought it on itself.

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Update 2:30pm ET Wednesday, June 28, 2017: After an 18-day trial, Beef Products Inc., privately settled its defamation case against ABC News for an undisclosed amount. Jim Avila, the ABC correspondent who covered the 2012 “pink slime” story, told reporters “it’s important to note we’re not retracting anything or apologizing for anything.” A spokeswoman from ABC news said settling the case was in the best interest of the network.

Remember pink slime? The gross term was all over the news five years ago when ABC News reported on processed meat trimmings that end up in ground beef consumed by Americans.  

In 2012, Beef Products, Inc., the manufacturer of this substance, sued ABC News for its reporting, which it called defamatory and misleading. The report aired a few months after McDonald’s, Burger King, and a few major grocery chains stopped purchasing BPI’s product. A few years later, the company’s revenue had dropped by nearly 80 percent. BPI has since closed three of its four plants and laid off more than 700 employees. The case went to trial this week in South Dakota.

So what exactly is the stuff known as pink slime? And is it as gross as the media has claimed? The ground beef filler—technically called lean, finely textured beef (LFTB)—is made by putting leaner meat trimmings (think excess trim below the hide, or other non-choice scraps) in a centrifuge and treating it with ammonia to remove any bacteria. It’s then made into blocks, often flash frozen, and ends up in grocery store meat aisles, fast food burger patties, and school lunches

This ammonia-scrubbed meat was billed as super safe—its producers claimed it was less likely than regular cuts to carry bacteria like E. coli and salmonella. Yesterday, the New York Times ran an op-ed by Alexander Aciman supporting that claim and defending LFTB. Here’s the key bit:

What seemed to scare consumers the most about pink slime — which ABC claimed was used in 70 percent of ground beef sold in American supermarkets — was that the lean beef trimmings were treated with ammonia. That sounds scary, but is actually perfectly safe. Ammonia is used to kill harmful bacteria that exists in the meat, but is present in such tiny quantities that it is not harmful to consume. The United States Department of Agriculture affirmed as much in a letter back in 2012, a few weeks after the ABC story aired. Indeed, Chips Ahoy cookies and Velveeta cheese contain similar ammonium compounds, like ammonium phosphate, as does Wonder Bread.

Aciman also points out that LFTB  is “an affordable source of lean meat for low-income Americans, and stigmatizing it hurts people who rely on it for protein.” Those are fair points, and he’s not the only one defending LFTB. Tweets from the trial suggest that both BPI lawyers and “meat experts” are also finding fault with the “pink slime” label:

Still, it’s worth recalling a bit of nuance that my colleague Tom Philpott reported back in 2012:

The idea was that pink slime contained enough ammonia that, when you mixed it with ground beef, it would effectively sterilize the resulting blend. And the USDA and FDA had taken that promise at face value, Moss reports. One “top official” of the USDA’s division that oversees the meat supply assured Moss, “It eliminates E. coli to the same degree as if you cooked the product.”  

Yet that premise was false. Rather than eliminating pathogens from burger mixes, pink slime was often actually adding pathogens, Moss revealed. Beef Products Inc.’s raw material, fatty trimmings that come mainly from the outside of the carcass, tend to be loaded with E. coli and salmonella. The company had been lowering its ammonia dose based on complaints about flavor. Possibly as a result, in tests conducted by the National School Lunch Program between 2005 and 2009, pink slime tested positive for salmonella at a rate four times higher than the conventional burger mix it was supposed to sterilize, Moss revealed.

The USDA had kept purchasing huge amounts of pink slime for schoolchildren despite the positive tests, Moss noted, precisely because it was cheaper than pure ground meat. “School lunch officials said they ultimately agreed to use the treated meat because it shaved about 3 cents off the cost of making a pound of ground beef,” Moss reported.

That last point is key: Mother Jones has reported extensively on the meat industry’s bid to increase its production even as its resources dwindle.

The trial is expected to last eight weeks. Beef Product, Inc. is suing for $1.9 billion in damages, but South Dakota law allows the amount to grow to as much as $5.7 billion. If awarded, the suit would be the largest food-related defamation case in US history. Bill Marler, a foodborne illness attorney who litigated lawsuits against burger producers nearly three decades ago, said he thinks it will be challenging for ABC News to win “not because they’ve done anything incorrect, but it’s going to be hard to get a jury in South Dakota to rule in favor of the media against a large meat manufacturer who employed a bunch of people.”

Listen to our interview with Bill Marler on foodborne illness and the history of food safety law  on our food politics podcast, Bite

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate