I don't think I understand what you mean... But I almost certainly have less information than them or probably you, so am happy to hear more.
IP assert: "This food was going to be thrown out & going to waste. We are using it for something!"
Article asserts: "That food wasn't being thrown out it was going to food banks and homeless shelters."
So while IP is almost certainly helping the farmers by paying them for produce they can't normally sell they certainly aren't reclaiming mountains of food otherwise destined for rot.
I don't know anything about either of these groups, but the article says that this is simply the marketing of Imperfect Produce that doesn't bear out in reality. Do you have information contradicting their points that you decided not to share?