FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:  April 6, 1989


        ALJ UPHOLDS FTC CHARGES THAT KRAFT MISREPRESENTED
          CALCIUM CONTENT OF INDIVIDUAL CHEESE SLICES;
                ORDERS END TO MISREPRESENTATIONS



     Kraft Inc. falsely advertised that its Kraft Singles cheese
slices contained as much calcium as five ounces of milk and
contain more calcium than do most imitation slices, a Federal
Trade Commission judge has ruled.  The Administrative Law Judge
has ordered the company not to misrepresent the nutrient content
of its individually wrapped slices of cheese in the future.

     The FTC issued its complaint against Kraft in 1987, charging
false, misleading and unsubstantiated advertising.

     One of the challenged ads said "Imitation slices use hardly
any milk.  But Kraft has five ounces per slice.  So her little
bones get calcium they need to grow."  ALJ Lewis F. Parker found
that "The ads' reference to the precise amount of milk in a Kraft
Single, and their reference to milk and calcium can be inter-
preted as implying that a slice of Kraft Singles contains the
same amount of calcium as five ounces of milk, and that --
because there is no mention that calcium is lost in the process-
ing of cheese -- the ads convey the milk equivalency claim."

     He also ruled that that language in the ads "can be inter-
preted, since they refer to calcium and milk, and emphasize the
amount of milk in a slice of Kraft Singles, as implying that
imitation slices which, they state, use hardly any milk, contain
less calcium than Kraft Singles.

     The milk equivalency claim was false, he said, because a
3/4 ounce slice of Kraft Singles has approximately 70 percent of
the calcium of five ounces of whole milk, and less than 68.2
percent of the calcium of five ounces of low-fat or skim milk. 
The smaller, 2/3 ounce slice therefore has even less calcium. 
"Thus, the claim that a slice of Kraft Singles contains the same
amount of calcium as five ounces of milk is false."  In addition,
"Kraft knew when it disseminated the challenged ads that its
Kraft Singles slices do not contain as much calcium as five
ounces of milk, and it introduced no substantiation to support
the milk equivalence claim." 

     Judge Parker also ruled that the claim that Kraft Singles
contain more calcium than do most imitation cheese slices was
false because virtually all non-diary slices contain the same
amount of calcium Kraft Singles do.  Kraft Singles' labels claim
that it contains 15 percent of the Recommended Daily Allowance
(RDA) of calcium per ounce, but the judge found, so did the imi-
tation and non-diary slices sold by Kraft's competitors.  He
said, "the companies that manufacture the vast majority of the
imitation slices sold in this country do not sell slices that
contain less than 15 percent of the United States RDA of calcium
per ounce and some contain more than this amount.  Thus, the
claim that Kraft Singles contain more calcium than most imitation
slices is false."  And again, "Kraft possessed no substantiation
for the imitation superiority claim at the time the ads were
first disseminated and offered none at the trial."

     However, the judge found, Kraft "did not intend to make" the
misrepresentations.  Whether the company should have known that
the false claims "could be inferred from the language of the
challenged ads is debateable."  He ruled, "the advertisements ...
were developed by Kraft in response to the success of non-dairy
imitation and substitute cheese slices, and were not intended to
convey express deceptive claims about Kraft Singles to consum-
ers."

     The judge therefore limited his order against Kraft "to
false and misleading claims about the amount or comparative
amount of calcium or any other nutrient in individually wrapped
slices of pasteurized process, imitation or substitute cheese
products."

     The judge's order is subject to review by the full Commis-
sion on its own motion or at the request of either party. If the
order is not appealed and is not independently reviewed by the
Commission within 30 days, it becomes the final Commission
order.

     Copies of the initial decision and order are available from
the FTC's Public Reference Branch, Room 130, 6th St. and Penn-
sylvania Ave. N.W. Washington, D.C. 20580; 202-326-2222; TTY
202-326-2502.

                             # # # 

MEDIA CONTACT:      Susan Ticknor, Office of Public Affairs, 
                    202-326-2181


(Docket No. 9208)

(KraftID)