While Eggology did indeed issue a modified press release not using the word "endorsement" on March 31, 2008, further investigation of this situation has revealed some interesting developments. This scanned image, downloaded from the Eggology web site, documents the May 2008 statement in AgriMarketing magazine that Eggology has maintained a "close association" with HSUS since the company's founding in the mid 1990's.

On June 25, 2008, nearly three months after the supposed retraction, the original version of the press release with the HSUS endorsement language was apparently re-issued by Amy Dunn, who at that time listed a contact number at Crier Communications, a Beverly Hills-based public relations firm that lists Eggology as one of its clients.

Four days later, on June 29, 2008, Ms. Dunn made this statement on an online forum: "Eggology, an all-natural egg white company recently became the first egg white company to be endorsed by the Humane Society of the United States."

And, interestingly, a copy of the press release downloaded from the Eggology web site on August 2, 2008, repeated the content of the original, including the mention of the HSUS endorsement and listing contact information for two more staff members at Crier Communications, one of whom is Peter Berk, a founding partner with 20 years of public relations experience.

While the nature of the relationship between Eggology and HSUS is still unclear, it seems that Eggology and HSUS, for unknown reasons, have dramatically different understandings of either what that relationship is, or of what aspects of it may be publicly revealed. If Eggology retracted the information regarding its relationship to HSUS, why has a reputable PR firm continued to propagate this information long after HSUS claims to have told Eggology it was false? What led Brad Halpern, CEO of Eggology, to seemingly become so confused about HSUS's endorsement or lack of endorsement of his products? If Mr. Halpern, his staff and the experienced PR firm he hired could be so confused for so long, what hope does the public have of understanding the nature of the relationship between this company that makes its profits by exploiting animals, and this large animal advocacy organization that has a stated goal of preventing animal cruelty and exploitation?

These are just some of the kinds of difficulties that arise when advocacy organizations become entangled in conflicts of interest. The time has come for animal organizations that collaborate with animal-using corporations to adopt and publish clear conflict of interest policies addressing such issues as the promotion of animal products, accepting donations and sponsorship money from animal-using corporations, endorsements and quid pro quo arrangements regarding publicity and legislative initiatives. This would spare their supporters and the general public, not to mention their colleagues and their own staff members, from the wasted effort, misinformation, confusion and disillusionment that will otherwise continue to result.

Hence, the editors of Humane Myth respectfully decline HSUS's request that we take down the original Eggology press release. Whether true or false or something in between, the content of this press release has been actively propagated for several months by Eggology and those working on its behalf.

Additional web sightings of the "endorsement" language:
Example 1
Example 2
Example 3
Example 4

Links to source web pages and documents referenced in this story (still available online as of August 2, 2008):
Original press release on Eggology web site
AgriMarketing news clipping
June 25 Press Release on PRLog
Summary of Amy Dunn posting (#11)
Full text of Amy Dunn posting
Amy Dunn posting on The Article Insiders

For more background, read this 2005 first-hand account of a gathering of egg producers invited to HSUS's national headquarters.