Niehoff, Arthur H. (author) and Anderson, J. Charnel (author)
Format:
Bibliography
Publication Date:
1960
Published:
International: George Washington University, Alexandria, Virginia
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: Byrnes5 Document Number: C12472
Notes:
Francis C. Byrnes Collection, Human Resources Research office, a nongovernmental agency of George Washington University. 30 p., Annotated bibliography of development-related case histories, by country.
Garrett M. Steede (author), Courtney Meyers (author), Nan Li (author), Erica Irlbeck (author), Sherice Gearhart (author), and Texas Tech University; University of Minnesota - Twin Cities
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2018
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 149 Document Number: D10103
Article 4; pgs. 1-16, On January 1, 2017, the final rule of the Veterinary Feed Directive (VFD) was put into place requiring
antibiotics approved for both humans and animals to be discontinued for growth promotion. This change was
brought on by the role growth promoters in livestock production play in the development of antibiotic
resistance. Antibiotic resistance increases the costs associated with human health care by increasing the length
of stays in the hospital and requiring more intensive medical care for patients. The purpose of this study was to
explore sentiment and characteristics of social media content and the characteristics of the key influencers
whose opinions had the greatest amount of reach on social media in regard to antibiotic use in livestock and
antibiotic resistance. Nuvi, a social media monitoring program, provided sentiment for each tweet and coded
64.8% of the content (n = 129) as negative compared to 38.2% (n = 76) humans coded as negative. The
contrast between human coders and Nuvi indicates there could be discrepancies between how Nuvi codes
content and the way a human might interpret the content. No key influencer discussed antibiotic use in
livestock positively. Findings suggest agricultural communicators should not rely completely on the output
from sentiment analysis programs to evaluate how the public discusses issues related to agriculture,
particularly controversial issues. Further, agricultural communications practitioners should prioritize
monitoring the content shared by key influencers in an effort to better understand the content being shared by
the most influential users. Recommendations for future research are provided.
2 pages, via Online journal, Every morning I wake up like thousands of others wondering if what I am experiencing is just a bad dream. As I move into the day I am acutely aware that it is not a bad dream and that I as a farmer and an activist have a responsibility to make this devastating situation better.
12 pages., Online via publication website., Traces the development of the slaughterhouse as a specialized institution through three major periods, beginning in the 18th century. Includes consequences of modern slaughterhouses on cities, small communities, and cultural values, perceptions and tensions.
Pal, R.N. (author), Sinha, M.N. (author), Sinha, P.R.R. (author), and SRS of National Dairy Research Institute, Bangalore, India; Director, Agricultural Extension and Communication, National Institute of Community Development, Hyderabad, India; Professor and Head, Department of Livestock Production and Management, Haryana Agricultural University, Hissar, India
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
1977-05
Published:
India
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 42 Document Number: B04932
James F. Evans Collection, All 143 farmer respondents of Amritsar Intensive Cattle Development Project were aware of breeding input but not of feeding input. Distinct patterns of communication source utilization were noticed in adoption of animal production inputs. Both formal and informal communication sources were almost equally utilized in awareness stage. Informal communication sources were given greater patronage in evaluation stage. Formal communication sources were utilized more in interest and adoption stages. However in trial stage, relatively compatible innovations like feeding input clustered around informal communication sources in contrast to breeding input in which more formal communication sources were contacted. For promotion of animal production inputs, therefore, animal husbandry extension programmes should give due consideration to implications of formal/informal communication sources as associated with stages in adoption. (author)
