Online from Capital Press. 2 pages., "Several agricultural organizations have gotten language included in the pending fiscal year 2017 House Agricultural Appropriations Bill asking USDA to exempt research and promotion boards funded by grower checkoff fees from federal public records law." The language argues the change is needed to focus producers' resources on research and promotion, rather than records services.
This paper examines the media coverage of the 2013 London cultured meat tasting event, particularly in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom. Using major news outlets, prominent magazines covering food and science issues, and advocacy websites concerning meat consumption, the paper characterizes the overall emphases of the coverage, the tenor of the coverage, and compares the media portrayal of the important issues to the demographic and psychological realities of the actual consumer market into which cultured meat will compete. In particular, the paper argues that Western media gives a distorted picture of what obstacles are in the path of cultured meat acceptance, especially by overemphasizing and overrepresenting the importance of the reception of cultured meat among vegetarians. Promoters of cultured meat should recognize the skewed impression that this media coverage provides and pay attention to the demographic data that suggests strict vegetarians are a demographically negligible group. Resources for promoting cultured meat should focus on the empirical demographics of the consumer market and the empirical psychology of mainstream consumers.
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Folder: 161` Document Number: D07869
Notes:
Pages 107-109 in M.J. Navarro (ed.), Voices and views: why biotech?. ISAAA Brief No. 50. International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications, Ithaca, New York. 158 pages.
Barkley, Andrew (author) and Barkkley, Paul W. (author)
Format:
Book
Publication Date:
2015
Published:
USA: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group, London and New York.
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 154 Document Number: D07071
Notes:
196 pages., "In an information-based economy...the only source of prosperity is providing consumers with what they desire." Authors conclude that the flow of information from consumers to producers may be more important than providing consumers with knowledge about agriculture.
Online from publication. 2 pages., Identification of produce items cited as problematic and acceptable by the Environmental Working Group. Article indicates that more than 99 percent of produce samples tested for these reports have residue levels that are compliant with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency standards (which EWG considers insufficient).
Perspectives on the role of an ethical public communicator in "this toxic political situation called the environmental debate." Author concludes that in this information environment "the real ethical issue lies with us - the informed citizenry. An ethical citizenry would be rhetorically savvy in order to make sound choices about their local economies and their global environment."
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.
