Document 7O7vEODVzrxGnbYaMejVaQm8j

m ftfit INTER - COMPANY AND OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE -- Gus Peed subject SPI Communications Committee DATE: March 22, 1977 FROM' Bettie S. McCarthy simm, ADDRESS Public Affairs 2030 M Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. TELEPHONE: 296-3306 The attached letter from Hill & Knowlton to Ed Ackerman illustrates the latest thinking on the Washington/New York press briefings I reported to you in December. For whatever reason, I think it is a wise idea to delay the briefings. BSM:ems cc: R. Gutheil A. Cumrnin H. Rosenzweig :a o N BOR 013783 IIIT.L A7s*u KXOW'LTOK, Itnc. Public Relations! / ftiblir Affairs Counsel ooo Til i H J) avkni: 1: XFW YORK. N Y. 10017 212 - i;i)7 -,-(ioO Robert L. Ferrante Seniortc# President March 18, 1977 Mr. Edward G. Ackerman Diamond Shamrock Chemical Co. 1100 Superior Avenue Cleveland, Ohio 44114 Dear Ed: We were asked at the last meeting of the VCM-PVC Steering Committee to consider the best available data from the health sub-committee and, if we thought we had more to gain than lose, to resume the editorial briefings. We are recommending that we do not resume the briefings at this time -- but not for lack of something substantive to say about the Maltoni and other research data that is postulating a danger of mammary gland tumors. Our counsel stems from the belief that the best opportunity in recent times is at hand in the form of the saccharin ban for the Delaney Clause to be examined and dissected publicly to disclose its flaws. If we all agree that that is a desirable end-result, than we feel the interested parties in the saccharin situation, including third-party medical, and scientific experts, as well as food-related companies will have the best shot at marshalling popular and legislative support for action on the clause. A separate account team at II&K is engaged in helping a group of food additive and food processing companies to keep the focus of the press, the public, Congress on the inadequacies of the Delaney Clause. This effort will include editorial briefings with both Washington and New York media. We considered the good sense of our going ahead with our briefings with the same media at the same time as the other industry group. A benefit might be to enlarge the picture for the press as to the far-reaching effects of the clause. But, we concluded that what is more likely to happen is that raising the consciousness of VCM/PVC now will actually muddy the focus and possibly confuse'the issue with the press, the public and Congress. The saccharin issue -- loft alone -- brings together some compelling factors that point up the rigidy of the Delaney Clause: questionable BOR 013784 Mr. Edward G. Ackerman Diamond Shamrock Chemical Co. March 18, 1977 2- - test data; substantiated, medically-supported essentiality of the product; popular sentiment for the product, and, the fact that risk-benefit analysis is being discussed in connection with an issue many people and thought leaders can relate to. So, to repeat, we recommend that VCM/PVC editorial briefing teams take a backseat to the other briefing effort. We intend to watch that effort closely and then, perhaps in the wake of the other briefings, recommend that we follow up with our own briefings on VCM/PVC. Please give me a call if you would like to discuss this further. Best regards. Cordially, RLF:jmv Robert L. Ferrante cc: VCM-PVC Steering Committee VCM-PVC Communications Committee/ R. L. Harding E. S. Nuspliger J. R. Lawrence J. H. Heckman J. Blizin J. M. Kiss M.M. Swetonic BOR 013785