Right to Know Blog

No on 37 Forced to Pull TV Ad After Misrepresenting Stanford University

The whole world is watching what's happening in California: JOIN US TODAY.

Miller_5.jpgIn a blistering admission of their own lack of credibility, the opponents of California’s GMO labeling measure yanked down and re-shot their first television ad after they were caught misrepresenting Stanford University in the ad, according to the Los Angeles Times. The ad identified Henry Miller as a doctor at Stanford University, without disclosing that Miller actually serves as a researcher at the Hoover Institute, a right-wing think tank at Stanford.

The ad violated Stanford's policy that prohibits consultants from using the university's name for political purposes. Stanford officials also insisted that the ad be reshot to remove the vaulted university buildings in the background, according to the LA Times. Millions of California voters had already seen the ad, which has been running hourly in major television markets across the state.

“The scandal over the Henry Miller ad is proof positive of the lack of credibility and lack of integrity of the No on 37 campaign, which is at this very moment unleashing a $35 million ad campaign of lies on the voters of California,” said Stacy Malkan, spokesperson for the Yes on 37 California Right to Know campaign.

The ad, now re-edited and back on the air, presents Henry Miller as a scientific expert as he reads from talking points written by the No on 37 campaign, claiming the GMO labeling law makes no sense. Miller is well known to front for industry groups including Big Tobacco and Big Oil. He has argued for the re-introduction of the toxic pesticide DDT, attacked US Food and Drug Administration safety regulators, and claimed low levels of radiation can be beneficial to human health.

“Who are you really going to trust?” Malkan asked.  “On the Yes on 37 side are millions of California consumers and more than 2,000 leading health, women’s, faith-based, labor and other groups; and a growing stack of peer-reviewed research linking genetically engineered foods to health and environmental problems.  On the No side is a small group of financially motivated corporations, including the same folks who told us DDT, Agent Orange and cigarettes were safe, making verifiably false assertions and being fronted by a well-documented special interest shill.”

BACKGROUND:  The Dubious Credibility of No on 37 Science Spokesperson Henry Miller  

Do you like this post?

Showing 2 reactions

commented 2012-10-09 00:03:03 -0700 · Flag
I published an examination of some of the other anti-Prop 37 ads entitled “Straw man arguments against Proposition 37, and a trip to the grocery store reveals the extent of the GMO food issue,” which can be found here: http://mathisencorollary.blogspot.com/2012/10/straw-man-arguments-against-proposition.html
commented 2012-10-06 20:30:55 -0700 · Flag
I have noticed alot of No on 37 editorials in most California papers. Most read eerily similar, almost scripted and lack any credability. It almost appears that the major advertisers, likely food and big Ag have “pleasantly” asked them to support the No campaign in return for future advertisement dollars.