Sir; Following your excellent coverage on the most bitter open warfare between superstores we can remember, readers might reflect on the damage this manipulation of the media has on the wholesale/independent industry. At a recent meeting of senior wholesalers it was remarked that radio and press coverage of the allegations made by one superstore against another on low price claims (which are unverifiable) make little difference to the superstores concerned. Experts seem to agree that the consumer is not convinced ­ she detects at best that someone is being economical with the truth. However, the vast amount of superstore promotion obtained free of charge does reinforce the image that superstores equal low prices. By enhancing this cut-price image in the mind of the shopper, there arises an automatic comparison with independent retailers (supplied by wholesalers) who are impotent in this show of rippling superstore muscle. We truly admire the remarkable efficiencies and marketing expertise of the superstores as much as we are transfixed by their ferocious public arguments. But a moral issue is arising ­ is it a practice of integrity for one superstore to claim price advantage when its management knows full well that angry competitors will run to the microphone or the word processor to create counter-claims and therefore more propaganda? You predict a role for the IGD "sitting alongside" superstores to correct public perceptions of the big guns. This would merely result in IGD becoming a superstore PR tool, cloaked in academia, which would still work against the interests of wholesalers and their independent retailers and those suppliers who are committed to the sector. Alan Toft Director general Federation of Wholesale Distributors {{LETTERS }}