20 pages, Knowledge of agricultural practices has declined in recent years, resulting in consumers becoming uncertain of where and how their food has been produced and the marketing tactics used to promote the product. Historically, the U.S. population’s rich agricultural heritage coincided with higher levels of agricultural literacy. Some scholars, however, have maintained that U.S. culture has begun to lose touch with its agricultural foundations. More recent evidence has demonstrated that consumers acquire knowledge about their food from various media, most notably the Internet and social media. Often these sources use incorrect information and promote food and agricultural marketing trends that may not be grounded in scientific data. In response, this historical narrative analyzed a reform effort that occurred in U.S. food labeling policy and practice in the 1900s, which contributed to food labeling issues and consumer distrust in the agricultural industry. Based on the findings of this investigation, we concluded that food labels were initially intended to provide consumers with more profound knowledge of the food they purchased. However, key legislative acts such as the Fair Packaging and Labeling Act and the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act shifted the food labeling movement into a branding device to differentiate products and brands. We recommend that agricultural practitioners explore new ways to communicate their message more effectively. We also call for producers to incorporate more personal and emotional appeals when marketing agricultural products to better compete with third-party branding efforts.
10 pages., Due to the Library's response to COVID-19, this document is currently only available through online access. If no link is provided in this record, the ACDC will make this document accessible through our collection once we are able to return to our office., This article explores some issues that have been important in the climate change mitigation debate in Australia. Findings suggest that opinion leaders believe the policy has been slow to progress due to media promotion of the uncertainty associated with climate change science, the weakness of leadership, and the political cost of unpalatable policy.
Traces the expansion in number of media options available during the past 30 years and expresses appreciation to readers for their readership of Successful Farming magazine in that competitive environment.
USA: Economic Research Service, U.S Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 30 Document Number: D10576
Notes:
37 pages., ERS staff report - No. AGEX831007. Also available online from Hathi Trust Digital Library., via library catalog., Food manufacturers spent $7 billion in advertising in 1997. Most of
this advertising focused on highly processed and highly packaged
foodswhich also tend to be the foods consumed in large quantities
in the United States relative to Federal dietary recommendations
such as the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. Advertising expenditures on meat, fruits, and vegetables are negligible. In contrast, the
U.S. Department of Agriculture spent $333.3 million on nutrition
education, evaluation, and demonstrations. This is approximately
what the food industry spent on advertising just for coffee, tea, and
cocoa, or for snacks and nuts; slightly more than half (60 percent)
the amount spent on advertising for carbonated soft drinks, and less
than half the amount spent promoting beer, or candy and gum, or
breakfast cereals.
