17 pages., Online by open access via ResearchGate.net., Researchers used a content analysis of randomly sampled advocacy group websites to evaluate the communication strategies and media relations efforts of these organizations. Results indicated that most of the "Stop AETA" coalition members "did little to educate the public about the legislation much less advocate for its defeat." They revealed limited use of online press rooms and creation of dialogue with key stakeholders.
21 pages., Online via UI e-subscription, "This paper exposes the failure of government institutions to protect animals on factory farms while simultaneously silencing what is currently the only available mechanism for Americans to learn about abuse on factory farms. It also explores the Constitutional implications of Ag-Gag laws.
A version of this article appears in print on September 6, 2015, Section A, Page 1 of the New York Edition of the New York Times with the headline, "Emails reveal academic ties in a food war.", Examines lobbying activities of firms and interest groups in the debate over bioengineered foods - and involving third-party scientists "and their supposedly unbiased research." Includes examples of interactions and financial support for university scientists by commercial firms.
Discourse about industrial animal agriculture contributing to global climate change. Examines how interest groups have responded to the release of "Livestock's Long Shadow," a 2006 report by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
