18 pages, via online journal article, On April 2016, the weekly Farm News cut its ties with veteran freelancer Rick Friday who drew a cartoon that called attention to how much the CEOs of large agricultural corporations are paid. This study examines the determinants of people’s attitudes toward Mr. Friday’s firing. Using data gathered from a national online survey of newspaper readers, this study traced the antecedents of these attitudes. While the incident drew strong negative reactions, we found that public attitudes were strongly mediated by readers’ attitudes toward Big Ag advertisers. That is, those who saw Big Ag in a positive light were more inclined to report less negative attitudes toward the firing. Another factor that influenced public reaction is the way people perceived the relationship between the farm press and their large corporate advertising sponsors. These findings indicated audience awareness of the synergy between content making and profit making in the farm news business, and that readers saw the relationship between big advertisers and the press as not necessarily adversarial. Those in agricultural states tended to see the editorial cartoon and the firing incident as more relevant to their lives than their counterparts in non-agricultural areas. However, the perceived relevance of the editorial cartoon and the firing incident had no bearing on people’s attitudes toward the incident. Implications of the findings on fostering a healthy relationship between farm newspapers, their readers, and the agribusinesses that advertise in them are discussed.
4 pages., Via online journal., ACE President Elizabeth Gregory North comments on JAC as evidence of the strong research tradition that is alive and well in ACE.
Lundy, Lisa K. (author), Rogers-Randolph, Tiffany M. (author), Lindsey, Angela B. (author), Hurdle, Clay (author), Ryan, Heather (author), Telg, Ricky W. (author), Irani, Tracy (author), and University of Florida
Format:
Online journal article
Publication Date:
2018
Published:
United States: New Prairie Press
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 152 Document Number: D10155
16 pages, via online journal article, Farming, by the very nature of the occupation, is riddled with uncertainty. The risks associated with the agriculture industry are just as diverse as the industry itself. For all risks, one challenge is the development and dissemination of safety communication materials tailored for diverse audiences. Valkenburg, Semetko, and Vreese (1999) examined common frames used in news media. Their analysis pointed to four commonly used news frames: conflict, human interest, responsibility and economic consequences. The purpose of this study was to describe the agricultural and health safety issues discussed in Florida news media during the year 2016, discussing the prominence of the frames outlined by Valkenburg et al. (1999). In this study, the most prominent frame was the human interest frame, followed by responsibility, economic consequences, and conflict. Frames carry a great deal of weight in shaping individuals’ opinions, attitudes, and actions towards agriculturally based messages; therefore it is essential for agricultural communicators to understand the framing of agricultural health and safety issues. Acknowledging the frames used in the reporting of agricultural issues allows agricultural communicators to enter into informed interactions with media outlets and better prepare the resources they provide to them. These framing analyses also provide agricultural communicators with a solid foundation on which to best position and frame their messaging on behalf of the industry. Further research is recommended to examine frames from an audience perspective and to investigate the impact of human interest frames in the presentation of agricultural news articles.
James F. Evans Collection, Research directors at American land-grant universities are optimistic regarding the future of agricultural biotechnology and expect the ongoing "biotechnology revolution" to benefit the public, including consumers and farmers. Unresolved public policy questions involving biotechnology do concern many of the research administrators who responded to an opinion poll, but the prevailing attitude appears to be on of confident expectation that solutions will in time emerge for all outstanding biotech problems. Asked about "biotechnology's ethical questions," a majority of the respondents that U.S. land-grant institutions are well equipped to deal with such questions. The respondents said biotechnology may pose environmental risks, but they did not expect biological catastrophes to occur. They said biotechnology could be used to foster low-input methods of agricultural production, and they were in favor of pursuing biotech research that might improve agriculture's sustainability. (original)
