Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 182 Document Number: C36925
Notes:
Via SciDev.net. 2 pages., Director of the non-profit media organisation, TVE Asia Pacific, argues that "the media and development organizations are currently part of the problem."
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 146 Document Number: C23211
Notes:
Greenwire (Environment and Energy Publishing, LLC) via Lexis-Nexis. 1 page., Critical analysis of a recent $5 million contract through which a public relations firm will ghostwrite for the U.S. Environmental Agency articles "for publication in scholarly journals and magazines."
Reports that focus group research among farm readers shows they want information that is not a commercial on the editorial pages they read. "Isn't it strange? The very credibility these folks crave is the first thing to disappear when publishers agree to relax their standards."
8 p., What do journalists think about information source trustworthiness, bias, and fairness in communicating agricultural biotechnology issues? Fifty Texas journalists and 40 national agriculture journalists representing newspapers and television media responded to this study. Journalists believed university scientists/researchers and newspapers were trustworthy, unbiased, and fair, while activist groups were untrustworthy, completely biased, and unfair in communicating agricultural biotechnology issues. They were most opposed to public opinion outweighing scientists' opinions when making decisions about scientific research. A substantial positive correlation occurred between national agriculture journalists' attitudes toward democratic processes in science (i.e., the extent that public opinion is considered in scientific decision-making processes) and trust in newspapers.
