KQED’s Forum: Farmers Market Fraud?

| June 11, 2011 | 2 Comments
  • 2 Comments

Customers shop for fresh vegetables at a farmers market on March 16, 2011 in San Francisco.

Customers shop for fresh vegetables at a farmers market on March 16, 2011 in San Francisco. Photo: Justin Sullivan/Getty

How can you be sure those cherries or plums from the farmers market are really local or organic? Last year, a TV station in Los Angeles found vendors making false claims — including stalls selling produce bought from wholesalers. KQED’s Forum discusses new proposals to increase enforcement, and find out how consumers can ensure they’re getting the genuine artichoke.

Host: Rachael Myrow

Related

Explore: , , , , , , , ,

Category: farmers markets, KQED, radio, san francisco

About the Author ()

I am the Senior Interactive Producer for KQED's online Food properties. I have designed and produced food-related websites and blogs for KQED including Bay Area Bites; Check, Please! Bay Area; Jacques Pepin's websites; Weir Cooking in the City and KQED.org's Food portal. When I am not creating and managing food websites I am taking photos of Bay Area Life and designing online navigation systems. My professional education and training includes: clinical psychology, photography, commercial cooking, web design, information architecture and UX . You can find me engaged in social media on Twitter @bayareabites and on Facebook at Bay Area Bites. I can also be found photoblogging at look2remember.
  • Ben

    Wow, kind of misleading and unfair to put a headline “Farmers’ Market Fraud?” right above a photo of the Civic Center farmers market.

  • http://www.kqed.org Wendy Goodfriend

    Ben – here is a response to your comment from KQED Radio’s Online Senior Editor: “The photo is merely intended to illustrate a farmer’s market, not to imply that any specific market or vendor in the photo is involved in fraudulent activity. The choice of photo (one that is generic in nature and without signs or names of vendors) and a generic caption were intentionally used to avoid the interpretation that we were implicating any specific vendor. Upon second look, I’m confident that we have succeeded in that.”