

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Eve Mitchell, +44 (0) 7962 437 128, emitchell@fweurope.org
Gabriella Zanzanaini, +32 488 409 662, gzanzanaini@fweurope.org
A new report and seafood-buying guide released today by Food & Water Europe shows that consumers can't always rely on labels if they want to buy sustainably. In fact, determining which seafood products are best for you and our planet can be a difficult job. A number of private fish certification programs boast reliable standards and labels to evaluate and market seafood as "environmentally friendly" or "sustainably produced", but what they don't tell you is at least as important as what they do, and that's where things get tricky for conscientious shoppers.
The new report De-Coding Seafood Eco-Labels: Why We Need Public Standards compares and contrasts existing private certifications including those of The Marine Stewardship Council, Global Aquaculture Alliance, and Friends of the Sea. It finds that a lack of meaningful official labelling standards has allowed private eco-labels to capture large portions of the market, but that these are not adequate indicators of sustainable seafood choices for consumers, restaurants or retailers, and in fact can contradict one another.
"People often think that if they buy seafood with an eco-label, it's automatically a good choice," said Wenonah Hauter, Executive Director of Food & Water Europe. "Unfortunately, these certifications don't assure that the product consumers are getting is actually eco-friendly, or that companies are improving their behaviour."
An analysis of many eco-labels found inadequacies with regard to environmental standards, social responsibility and community relations, labour regulations, international law, and transparency. Some of the findings include:
Flawed fisheries are often certified. Some programs use their eco-label as incentive for a fishery or farm to make improvements. However, consumers have no way of knowing if the fish they are eating comes from a fishery that has merely pledged improvements or one that meets all the criteria for an eco-label. Some critics have claimed that in many cases, few improvements are made after certification.
Conflicts result from labels used for marketing purposes. Eco-labels are often predominantly used as a marketing tool. Certifiers are reliant upon increasing the number of fisheries certified in order to continue building their name and market share--an inherent conflict that can result in objectionable certifications.
Carbon footprints are often not considered. Most eco-labels fail to include "food miles" in their standards. New Zealand hoki, therefore, can be eco-labelled for sale in San Francisco.
They don't meet FAO guidelines. The Food & Agriculture Organization (FAO) has standards for eco-labelling and certification programs, but an analysis shows them lacking in regard to FAO's standards on transparency, damage mitigation from pollution, and contribution to rural development and food security.
"Consumers aren't told that these labels often have a 'pay to play' aspect," said Eve Mitchell of Food & Water Europe. "A well-managed fishery that can't finance certification may not have an eco-label and still be the best choice, while one that is less sustainable could be certified because someone paid for it. As a result of this, labels can actually encourage consumers to buy less sustainable products, and it can be challenging for consumers to decipher whether labels are very meaningful. To us this is getting very close to actually misleading consumers, which must be dealt with officially."
The report concludes that the European Commission should 1) expand the information required on seafood labels to close current loopholes, and 2) fulfil their intention to ensure labels adhere to FAO guidelines by developing specific and clear interpretations of those guidelines, requiring all certifiers to adhere to them and enforcing those regulations.
In the meantime, consumers can use the questions in the guide to help them assess the quality and sustainability of seafood they buy.
"While some high-profile areas get attention, reforming the Common Fisheries Policy to end discards or put new labels on tinned tuna is simply not enough to protect our oceans, which are under increasing pressure from the industrial fishing and unchecked corporate harvesting that erroneously leads to products sold as 'sustainable,'" said Mitchell. "Consumers want to do the right thing, and we think many will be hopping mad to learn the eco-labels they trusted have only told part of the story. We don't believe you have to 'work with' multinational companies because they are there already. It only lets them hide behind pretty labels, and if what they are doing is wrong, we'll say so."
Read the new report.
Food & Water Europe is a program of Food & Water Watch, Inc., a non-profit consumer NGO based in Washington, D.C., working to ensure clean water and safe food in Europe and around the world. We challenge the corporate control and abuse of our food and water resources by empowering people to take action and transforming the public consciousness about what we eat and drink.
Food & Water Watch mobilizes regular people to build political power to move bold and uncompromised solutions to the most pressing food, water, and climate problems of our time. We work to protect people's health, communities, and democracy from the growing destructive power of the most powerful economic interests.
(202) 683-2500In 1943, the Norwegian writer Knut Hamsun gave his Nobel Prize for Literature to the infamous Nazi criminal.
Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado's gifting of her 2025 Nobel Peace Prize to US President Donald Trump raised eyebrows around the world Friday—but it wasn't the first time that the winner of the prestigious award gave it away.
Last month, the Norwegian Nobel Committee awarded the peace prize to the 58-year-old opposition leader "for her tireless work promoting democratic rights for the people of Venezuela and for her struggle to achieve a just and peaceful transition from dictatorship to democracy."
Machado joined a notorious group of Nobel Peace laureates who either waged or advocated for war, as she backed Trump's aggression against her country. This has included a massive troop deployment, military and CIA airstrikes, bombing of boats allegedly transporting drugs, and the abduction earlier this month of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores.
Trump has ordered the bombing of nine other countries during his two terms, more than any other president in history. US forces acting on his orders have killed thousands of civilians in Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Nigeria, Pakistan, Somalia, Syria, Venezuela, and Yemen. While running for president in 2016, Trump vowed to "bomb the shit out of" Islamic State militants and "take out their families," and then followed through on his promise.
Despite being passed over by Trump for installation in any leadership role in Venezuela so far, Machado presented Trump with her framed Nobel medal along with a certificate of gratitude during a Thursday meeting at the White House. Trump subsequently posted on his Truth Social network that “María presented me with her Nobel Peace Prize for the work I have done. Such a wonderful gesture of mutual respect.”
In 1943!!!“Nobel Literature laureate Knut Hamsun famously gave his Nobel medal and diploma to Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels as a gesture of admiration for the Nazi regime, following his support for the occupation….”
[image or embed]
— Molly Jong-Fast (@mollyjongfast.bsky.social) January 16, 2026 at 10:56 AM
That gesture prompted the Norwegian Nobel Committee to issue a statement noting that the prize cannot be given away.
"Even if the medal or diploma later comes into someone else’s possession, this does not alter who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize," the committee said. "A laureate cannot share the prize with others, nor transfer it once it has been announced. A Nobel Peace Prize can also never be revoked. The decision is final and applies for all time."
The committee's statement was extraordinary—but this is not the first time that a Nobel winner gave away their prize. In 1943, Norwegian author Knut Hamsun gifted his 1920 Nobel Prize for Literature—awarded for his novel Markens Grøde (Growth of the Soil)—to Nazi Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels after a trip to Germany. Other Nobel laureates have donated or sold their medals.
The progressive media outlet Occupy Democrats said on social media: "Clearly, the similarities between Trump and Goebbels extend beyond just a mutual admiration for fascism. Both men possess(ed) the kind of spiritually sick, egotistical temperament that allows one to accept a prize that someone else has earned."
"Obviously, Donald Trump does not deserve the Nobel Peace Prize," the outlet continued. "He has bombed Iran, Yemen, Nigeria, innocent fishing boats in the Caribbean, Venezuela, and is in the process of turning the United States into a war zone. That said, Machado doesn't deserve it either."
"Anyone spineless enough to surrender the prize to an evil man like Trump in the hopes of obtaining power is not someone we should be celebrating," Occupy Democrats added.
Last month, Wikileaks founder and multiple Nobel Peace Prize nominee Julian Assange sued the Nobel Foundation—the Swedish organization that manages administration of the approximately $1.2 million-per-winner prize—in a bid to prevent Machado from receiving the money.
Machado's win also sparked protests outside the Norwegian Nobel Institute in Oslo.
"No, imperialists, we have absolutely no fear of you... and we don't like to be threatened," said Cuba's president.
A day after receiving the remains of the 32 Cubans killed during the Trump administration's invasion of Venezuela and abduction of its leader, Cuba's president, Miguel Díaz-Canel, addressed thousands gathered outside the US Embassy in Havana on Friday.
"The current US administration has opened the door to an era of barbarism, plunder, and neo-fascism," Díaz-Canel declared to a massive crowd protesting the recent killings and demanding the US release Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.
Participants in the "anti-imperialist" action, including members of the armed forces, waved Cuban and Venezuelan flags, and held signs honoring the 32 people who were killed while carrying out missions representing Cuba's Revolutionary Armed Forces and the Ministry of the Interior.
"No one here surrenders," the Cuban leader said Friday, according to the Associated Press. "The current emperor of the White House and his infamous secretary of state haven't stopped threatening me."
While the Biden administration aimed to remove Cuba from the State Sponsors of Terrorism list, President Donald Trump reversed that decision after returning to office last January and restored a list of "restricted entities" created during his first term. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the son of Cuban immigrants, also expanded a visa restriction policy that targets Cuba's medical missions around the world.
Since US forces slaughtered dozens of Cubans while seizing Maduro, Trump and Rubio have warned that Cuba, Mexico, and Colombia could also be targeted by the US military. Trump has also urged the Cuban government to make a deal with him and pledged to prevent oil and other resources from reaching the island nation, which has been subjected to US sanctions for decades.
"No, imperialists, we have absolutely no fear of you... and we don't like to be threatened," Díaz-Canel said Friday, waving his finger at the embassy, according to Reuters. "You will not intimidate us."
"Cuba does not have to make any political concessions, and that will never be on the table for negotiations aimed at reaching an understanding between Cuba and the United States," he asserted. "It is important that they understand this. We will always be open to dialogue and improving relations between our two countries, but only on equal terms and based on mutual respect."
The demonstration in Havana came a day after Venezuelan workers led a march through Caracas, chanting, "Free Maduro!"
"He is our president and we want him back, we are in the streets, and we will not rest," said labor leader Anais Herrera. "The president prepared us for this, and that is why we are in combat, in the streets with the Venezuelan working class."
Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, were brought to New York City after their abduction. They were arraigned last week, and both pleaded not guilty to federal narco-terrorism charges. At the time, Maduro said in Spanish that "I am the president of Venezuela, and I consider myself a prisoner of war."
At the arraignment, Maduro's lawyer, Barry Pollack, said that he "is the head of a sovereign state and is entitled to the privileges and immunities that go with that office... In addition, there are issues about the legality of his military abduction."
Federal prosecutors and Trump have given no indications that they are willing to free Maduro or Flores. The US administration is also continuing its efforts to take control of Venezuela's oil resources.
One campaigner said the hunger strike "will be remembered as a landmark moment of pure defiance; an embarrassment for the British state."
Three British activists jailed for alleged involvement with the banned anti-genocide group Palestine Action ended their monthslong hunger strike late Wednesday after the UK government rejected a $2.7 billion contract for a subsidiary of Israel's largest weapons maker, Elbit Systems.
Prisoners for Palestine (P4P), which represents the hunger strikers, said that Hamran Ahmed, Heba Muraisi, and Lewie Chiaramello would accept food again. Muraisi hadn't eaten in 73 days, while Ahmed refused food for 66 days and Chiaramello, who has Type 1 diabetes, fasted every other day for 44 days.
"It is definitely a time for celebration," Chiaramello said Thursday. "A time to rejoice and to embrace our joy as revolution and as liberation."
P4P spokesperson Francesca Nadin told the New Arab that the hunger strike "will be remembered as a landmark moment of pure defiance; an embarrassment for the British state."
"Banning a group and imprisoning our comrades has backfired on the British state, direct action is alive, and the people will drive Elbit out of Britain for good," P4P added. "This is just the beginning. Even though the people who have just finished their hunger strike will have some time to recover, they’re also really motivated and want to continue doing as many things as possible."
P4P said other hunger-striking members of the "Filton 24"—Teuta Hoxha, Jon Cink, Qesser Zuhrah, and Amu Gib—were also accepting food following the UK government's announcement that it would not award a military training contract to Elbit Systems' British subsidiary.
The end of the strike came as Ahmed, Muraisi, and Chiaramello suffered deteriorating health, with Muraisi telling a friend earlier this week that she was "dying."
Two dozen alleged Palestine Action activists are accused of breaking into Elbit Systems' research and development facility in Filton in 2024. Alleged members of the group also staged direct action protests targeting other UK weapons factories that export arms to Israel as it wages a genocidal war in Gaza.
P4P hailed the contract cancellation as "a resounding victory for the hunger strikers, who resisted with their incarcerated bodies to shed light on the role of Elbit Systems, Israel's largest weapons manufacturer, in the colonization and occupation of Palestine."
British lawmakers voted last year to ban Palestine Action as a terrorist group after some of its members allegedly vandalized aircraft at a Royal Air Force base in Oxfordshire. Members of the group also allegedly vandalized US President Donald Trump’s golf course in Turnberry, Scotland. Because of the vote, the nonviolent group is on the same legal footing in Britain as Al-Qaeda and Islamic State. Joining or supporting Palestine Action is punishable by up to 14 years behind bars.
Since Palestine Action was banned, more than 2,000 people have been arrested for supporting the group, often while simply holding signs.