6th International Virtual Congress (IVC-2019) And Workshop.  International E-publication: Publish Projects, Dissertation, Theses, Books, Souvenir, Conference Proceeding with ISBN.  International E-Bulletin: Information/News regarding: Academics and Research

What do we know about the innate potato? A study on the media and online interest and the stakeholders involved

Author Affiliations

  • 1Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Missouri-Columbia, 322 Mumford Hall, 65211, USA

Int. Res. J. Social Sci., Volume 6, Issue (1), Pages 12-18, January,14 (2017)

Abstract

In 2015, the commercial planting of the “Innate” potato, a Genetically Modified (GM) crop, was approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA). This potato, in contrast with most GM crops, was engineered with the potato’s own genes to have lower levels of sugars and to produce lower levels of acrylamide. This study investigates the international media coverage of this GM product and the online-interest during 2015. The study reveals that the media showed only a slight interest on the crop except during the short period when the decision about the Innate potato’s regulation was under discussion by the FDA authorities. The stakeholders most involved in the discussion came from the financial and economic realms. Online-searches, showed more continuous attention, though with decreasing rates. It is important to understand how media covers food-related events, especially in the light of the New Breeding and Genome Editing techniques.

References

  1. Qaim M. (2016)., GM Crop Regulation., In Genetically Modified Crops and Agricultural Development, 109-134. Palgrave Macmillan US.
  2. Bauer Martin W., John Durant and George Gaskell (1998)., Biotechnology in the public sphere: a European sourcebook., NMSI Trading Ltd.
  3. Marks L.A., Kalaitzandonakes N., Wilkins L. and Zakharova L. (2007)., Mass media framing of biotechnology news., Public Understanding of Science, 16(2), 183-203.
  4. Qaim Matin (2016)., The Complex Public Debate., In Genetically Modified Crops and Agricultural Development, pp. 135-163. Palgrave Macmillan US.
  5. Lynas M. (2013)., Time to call out the anti-GMO conspiracy theory., Mark Lynas speech hosted by the International Programs–College of Agriculture and Life Sciences (50th Anniversary Celebration), and the Atkinson Center for a Sustainable Future, Cornell University.
  6. F.D.A. (2015)., Submissions on Bioengineered New Plant Varieties - Biotechnology Consultation Agency., Response Letter BNF 000141
  7. F.D.A. (2015)., Press Announcements - FDA concludes Arctic Apples and Innate Potatoes are safe for consumption.,
  8. Waltz E. (2012)., Tiptoeing around transgenics., Nature biotechnology, 30(3), 215-217.
  9. Waltz E. (2015)., USDA approves next-generation GM potato., Nature biotechnology, 33(1), 12-13.
  10. Charles D. (2015)., GMO Potatoes Have Arrived. But Will Anyone Buy Them? NPR, all things considered.,
  11. Bauer Martin W. (2002)., Biotechnology-the making of a global controversy., Cambridge University Press.
  12. Bauer M.W. and Bonfadelli H. (2002)., Controversy, media coverage and public knowledge., Biotechnology: The making of a global controversy, 149-75.
  13. McCluskey J.J., Kalaitzandonakes N. and Swinnen J. (2015)., Media Coverage, Public Perceptions, and Consumer Behavior: Insights from New Food Technologies., Annual Review of Resource Economics, (0).
  14. Marks L. and Kalaitzandonakes N. (2002)., Mass Media Communications About Agrobiotechnology., AgBioForum. Available at http://www. agbioforum.org.
  15. Galata L., Karantininis K. and Hess S. (2014)., Cross-Atlantic differences in biotechnology and GMOs: a media content analysis., Agricultural Cooperative Management and Policy (pp. 299-314). Springer International Publishing.
  16. Bryant Jennings and Mary Beth Oliver (2009)., Media effects: Advances in theory and research., Routledge.
  17. Goffman E. (1974)., Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience., Harvard University Press.
  18. Bruns A., Burgess J.E., Crawford K. and Shaw F. (2012)., qldfloods and, undefined
  19. QPSMedia: Crisis communication on Twitter in the 2011 south east Queensland floods.
  20. Eysenbach G., Powell J., Kuss O. and Sa E.R. (2002)., Empirical studies assessing the quality of health information for consumers on the world-wide web: a systematic review., Jama, 287(20), 2691-2700.
  21. Gilbert E. and Karahalios K. (2009)., Predicting tie strength with social media., In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 211-220). ACM.
  22. Hancock K., Veguilla V., Lu X., Zhong W., Butler E.N., Sun H. and Brammer T.L. (2009)., Cross-reactive antibody responses to the 2009 pandemic H1N1 influenza virus., New England Journal of Medicine, 361(20), 1945-1952.
  23. Liu S.B., Palen L., Sutton J., Hughes A.L. and Vieweg S. (2008)., In search of the bigger picture: The emergent role of on-line photo sharing in times of disaster., In Proceedings of the Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management Conference (ISCRAM).
  24. Maireder A. and Schlögl S. (2014)., 24 hours of an, outcry: The networked publics of a socio-political debate.
  25. Xiang Z. and Gretzel U. (2010)., Role of social media in online travel information search., Tourism management, 31(2), 179-188.
  26. McCluskey J.J. and Swinnen J.F. (2004)., Political economy of the media and consumer perceptions of biotechnology., American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 86(5), 1230-1237.
  27. Cacciatore M.A., Anderson A.A., Choi D.H., Brossard D., Scheufele D.A., Liang X. and Dudo A. (2012)., Coverage of emerging technologies: A comparison between print and online media., New Media & Society, 14(6), 1039-1059.
  28. Malyska A., Bolla R. and Twardowski T. (2016)., The role of public opinion in shaping trajectories of agricultural biotechnology., Trends in biotechnology.
  29. Etc Group (2007)., Extreme genetic engineering: An introduction to synthetic biology., accessed on November 2016.