Paywalls shouldn’t block life-saving food recall information

Editor’s note: The points raised in this column are exactly why Food Safety News continues to offer recall and outbreak information free of charge.

When 48 infants across 17 states became gravely ill after consuming ByHeart powdered infant formula, their parents did what any parent would: they searched desperately for answers. Too often, the recall alerts that could have protected those babies were locked behind a paywall. This isn’t just a media industry problem, it’s a food justice problem. No one should be denied access to critical recall alerts like this one. As the growing national conversation around paywalls makes clear, hiding critical public health information behind a pay barrier doesn’t just limit readership. It determines who gets to protect their family and who doesn’t.

Each year, contaminated food claims the lives of an estimated 3,000 Americans, sends 128,000 to the hospital (CDC, 2011), and costs the economy upwards of $36.6 billion (in 2013 dollars) (USDA ERS, 2015). But it doesn’t have to be this way. Many of these tragedies can be prevented if people have the information necessary to identify and avoid recalled food products.

Research has consistently shown that consumers get information about food recalls from traditional and online news sources. However, recall alerts in digital news media are often locked behind paywalls. Many of us have clicked on a provocative headline warning of the recall of a food that is “life-threatening,” only to find that the details needed to identify the recalled products are hidden behind a paywall; a barrier to viewing information essential to protecting public health.

Disseminating timely information about recalls of food products is essential to prevent unnecessary illnesses and deaths caused by eating contaminated foods. Broadcasting this news as widely as possible is key to consumer awareness and action.

However, the reality is that most consumers don’t pay for digital news subscriptions, and those who do are older, have higher incomes, and are predominantly white. In June 2025, the Pew Research Center reported that only 17% of U.S. adults had paid for digital news in the past year. Yet nearly three-quarters (74%) reported running into paywalls when looking for news online. And, when encountering one, only 1% reported paying to access it. Instead, more than half (53%) looked elsewhere for free content, and a third (32%) gave up entirely.

This data suggests that hiding essential information about food recalls behind paywalls neither improves public health nor the bottom lines of the publications. So, why not make the information about deadly food contamination free for the public?

We’ve seen news organizations rise to the occasion when public health is at risk. During the COVID-19 pandemic, publications made health information freely available. The same is often true for emergency preparedness alerts about hurricanes, floods, or wildfires. These are moments when public health and safety outweigh commercial considerations. Food recalls deserve the same treatment.

Paywalls aren’t the only obstacle to the timely, widespread dissemination of recall information, but they’re ones we can address quickly and easily. Newsrooms can take a simple step: make food recall alerts accessible to everyone, regardless of subscription status.

The stakes could not be higher. It is our job to ensure our food supply is safe for everyone, but particularly the most vulnerable in our society. In the case of the ByHeart recall, if parents didn’t have access to recall information, they would be unable to protect their babies. A paywall should never mean a missed chance to protect your family’s health. Charging a fee to access this information by putting it behind a paywall is just wrong. Removing paywalls for food safety alerts is not just good journalism; it’s a public service that saves lives and helps to protect the public’s health and well-being. When critical public health information is locked away from those who need it most, we fail in our fundamental duty to keep our communities safe.

About the authors:

Sandra Eskin, JD, is Chief Executive Officer of Stop Foodborne Illness. She served as USDA Deputy Under Secretary for Food Safety in the Biden Administration, helping lead the Office of Food Safety and the Food Safety and Inspection Service. Before that, Sandra directed the Safe Food Project at The Pew Charitable Trusts.  

Vanessa Coffman, PhD, is Director of the Alliance to Stop Foodborne Illness, driving efforts to build stronger, positive food safety cultures across the industry. Trained in environmental epidemiology at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, her research has focused on food systems and industrial agriculture’s impact on workers and communities.

William Hallman, PhD, is a Distinguished Professor in the Department of Human Ecology at Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey. A research psychologist with expertise in risk perception and risk communication, he studies how consumers hear about and respond to food recalls.

Ben Chapman, PhD, is currently serving as the interim Associate Director of NC State Extension, the Department Head of Agricultural and Human Sciences, Professor, and Director of the Safe Plates food safety extension and research program at North Carolina State University. His work focuses on reducing foodborne illness through research on food handling and safety systems, developing and implementing strategies, and evaluating food safety messages from farm to fork.