Madison, Wisconsin
September 24, 2007
Although the vast majority of
Americans are blithely unaware, the United States and its system
of food production is irreversibly hitched to modern
biotechnology. In short, most people unwittingly and regularly
consume food that was produced through genetic engineering.
With the exception perhaps of the local organic food cooperative
and direct-to-consumer organic farms, it may well be impossible
to avoid consuming food products that have not been touched by
modern agricultural biotechnology and genetically modified
organisms (GMOs). Tens of millions of acres of genetically
modified crops, in particular corn and soybeans, are planted
each year and find their way into the processed foods that are
the staple of the American diet.
Although there was debate and controversy in the early days
(remember bovine growth hormone?), for the most part Americans
have either accepted the new technology or ignored the issue and
go right on munching corn chips and drinking fruit juice made
with the help of crops that have genes from organisms other than
corn built in to enhance production or quality.
For its part, the popular news media in America portrayed issues
of GMO safety and environmental risk as typical controversies,
covering the poles of the subject with not a great body of work
delineating the objective merits and demerits of the technology.
The result is a public that, for the most part, is uninformed
about what is on its collective dinner plate and the costs of
its production.
To tease out the issue of public perception of GMOs, modern
agricultural biotechnology and the role of the press,
University of Wisconsin-Madison
journalism Professor Dominique Brossard and a small
international army of her colleagues have collaborated to
produce "The Public, the Media and Agricultural Biotechnology."
The book is a 405-page scholarly compendium that explores public
perception of agricultural biotechnology using case studies and
analyses of the mosaic of public opinion and news media behavior
in the United States and other countries, notably the United
Kingdom, Germany, India, Switzerland, the Philippines and South
Africa.
The international perspective is fascinating, as public debate
over GMO food can vary dramatically depending on cultural and
national context. In Germany, for instance, a country with a
rich and dramatic association with transformational
technologies, GMOs in food are verboten as far as the public is
concerned, although medical advances utilizing genetic
engineering are well accepted.
Alternatively, the Philippines was the first country in Asia to
have a biotech crop for food and feed approved for
commercialization. The introduction there of maize engineered to
express the Bacillus thuringiensis bacterial toxin to thwart the
Asian maize borer unfolded over seven years of "rigid scientific
study and evaluation, with the public and private sectors
involved in the various stages of the research and development
process." Still, there was bitter debate between those for and
against.
The book, according to Brossard, is an effort to bridge academic
assessment of public opinion and how it is formed through the
press for policymakers, scientists, and others who seek to
influence public opinion, including journalists. Three
additional UW-Madison faculty contributed: journalism professors
Sharon Dunwoody and Dietram Scheufele, and life sciences
communication Professor Al Gunther.
The big lesson for policymakers and scientists, explains
Brossard, is that, for any given issue, there is "a complex
model of public opinion that comes into play and a naive
approach is a recipe for failure." Among the many variables that
influence public debate on GMOs, and consequently public
opinion, are the ethical, legal, social and scientific
implications of the technology.
The lessons presented in "The Public, the Media and Agricultural
Biotechnology" are a valuable blueprint for effectively bringing
the public into any discussion of technology. As society
wrestles with new technological controversies - stem cells and
nanotechnology come quickly to mind - the hope is some of that
blueprint will help frame the debates in constructive ways.
The book is edited by Brossard, Fairfield University Professor
of Communication James Shanahan and T. Clint Nesbitt of the
Biotechnology Regulatory Services of the U.S. Department of
Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. The
publisher is the not-for-profit intergovernmental organization
CABI, based in Oxford, UK. |
|
