Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 146 Document Number: C23347
Notes:
From SourceWatch, a project of the Center for Media and Democracy. 3 pages., Brief description of the BMTC, including information services provided, budget and staffing.
Gibson, Rhonda (author), Perkins, Joseph W., Jr. (author), Sundar, S. Shyam (author), and Zillmann, Dolf (author)
Format:
Report
Publication Date:
1994
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 98 Document Number: C08031
Notes:
James F. Evans Collection, Mimeographed, 1994. 32 p. Paper presented at the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication Convention in Atlanta, GA, August 10-13, 1994., A news report on the plight of some family farmers, presented in magazine format, was manipulated to create versions differing in the degree of precision of general information (precise, imprecise) and in the use of exemplifying case histories and testimonials (selective, mixed, representative). Precise information consisted of quantitative data from pertinent research. Imprecise information consisted of qualitative assertions. Selective exemplification featured only cases consistent with the focus of the report. Representative exemplification featured a distribution of consistent and inconsistent cases in proportion with their distribution in the population. Mixed exemplification featured a balanced distribution of consistent and inconsistent cases. In two experiments, respondents reported their own views of the issue at different times after reading (no delay, two week/one week delay). In both investigations, the accuracy of estimates of failing farms was found to be highest for representative and lowest for selective exemplification, with mixed exemplification achieving an intermediate degree of accuracy. This effect of exemplar distributions was stable over time (i.e., over the two/one week period). Also in both investigations, the effect of the precision of general information proved negligible. Regarding the report itself, the three versions of exemplification were not considered differently informative. However, selective exemplification was deemed more distressing to read than representative exemplification. (original)
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 9 Document Number: B01348
Notes:
AgComm Teaching. Hal R. Taylor Collection (abstract), St. Paul, Minnesota: Agricultural Extension Service, Institute of Agriculture, University of Minnesota, Extension Methods Series No. 3. 5 pp.
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 10 Document Number: B01359
Notes:
AgComm Teaching. Review of Extension Research 1946/47-1956, Extension Service Circular 506, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C., Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept of Agriculture, 24pp (Extension Service Circular 488)
USA: Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 163 Document Number: C27089
Notes:
M004. 15 pages., Produced by the National Association of Conservation Districts, Natural Resources Conservation Service and the National Association of State Conservation Agencies.
Gifford, Claude W. (author / Director, Office of Communication, U.S. Department of Agriculture)
Format:
Report
Publication Date:
Circa 1975
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 49 Document Number: D10718
Notes:
Claude W. Gifford Collection. Beyond his materials in the ACDC collection, the Claude W. Gifford Papers, 1919-2004 are deposited in the University of Illinois Archives. Serial Number 8/3/81. Locate finding aid at https://archives.library.illinois.edu/archon/, 3 pages., Detailed listing of more than 40 information services provided by the Office of Communication for varied audiences, including policy makers, producers, consumers, and others. Includes counts and audience sizes of many media services, from daily phone calls to the annual Yearbook of Agriculture. Specific year(s) involved are not identified.
