IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/jloagb/14674.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Media Coverage Of Agrobiotechnology: Did The Butterfly Have An Effect?

Author

Listed:
  • Marks, Leonie A.
  • Kalaitzandonakes, Nicholas G.
  • Allison, Kevin
  • Zakharova, Ludmila

Abstract

This study examines media coverage of genetically modified (GM) crops in a risk communication framework. Content analysis is employed to investigate how specific environmental, food safety, and landmark events, such as the monarch butterfly and Pusztai controversies, and the cloning of Dolly-the-sheep, were reported by the media. Media coverage is from United Kingdom and United States newspapers over the period 1990 through 2001. On balance, findings show that the UK press has been more negative than the U.S. press in its coverage of GM crops. In addition, environmental and food safety events had a significant impact on the level and cycle of GM crop coverage.

Suggested Citation

  • Marks, Leonie A. & Kalaitzandonakes, Nicholas G. & Allison, Kevin & Zakharova, Ludmila, 2003. "Media Coverage Of Agrobiotechnology: Did The Butterfly Have An Effect?," Journal of Agribusiness, Agricultural Economics Association of Georgia, vol. 21(1), pages 1-20.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:jloagb:14674
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.14674
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/14674/files/21010001.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.14674?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kym Anderson & Gordon Rausser & Johan Swinnen, 2013. "Political Economy of Public Policies: Insights from Distortions to Agricultural and Food Markets," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 51(2), pages 423-477, June.
    2. Katja Pietrzyck & Nora Berke & Vanessa Wendel & Julia Steinhoff-Wagner & Sebastian Jarzębowski & Brigitte Petersen, 2021. "Understanding the Importance of International Quality Standards Regarding Global Trade in Food and Agricultural Products: Analysis of the German Media," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-20, April.
    3. Halley E Froehlich & Rebecca R Gentry & Michael B Rust & Dietmar Grimm & Benjamin S Halpern, 2017. "Public Perceptions of Aquaculture: Evaluating Spatiotemporal Patterns of Sentiment around the World," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(1), pages 1-18, January.
    4. Miljkovic, Dragan & Mostad, Daniel, 2005. "Impact of Changes in Dietary Preferences on U.S. Retail Demand for Beef: Health Concerns and the Role of Media," Journal of Agribusiness, Agricultural Economics Association of Georgia, vol. 23(2), pages 1-16.
    5. Ventura, Vera & Frisio, Dario G., 2015. "How scary! An analysis of visual communication concerning genetically modified organisms in Italy," 2015 International European Forum (144th EAAE Seminar), February 9-13, 2015, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 206247, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    6. repec:lic:licosd:32312 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Peake, Whitney O. & Detre, Joshua D. & Carlson, Clinton C., 2014. "One bad apple spoils the bunch? An exploration of broad consumption changes in response to food recalls," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(P1), pages 13-22.
    8. Grant Lewison, 2007. "The reporting of the risks from genetically modified organisms in the mass media, 2002–2004," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 72(3), pages 439-458, September.
    9. McFadden, Brandon R. & Lusk, Jayson L., 2013. "Effects of Cost and Campaign Advertising on Support for California’s Proposition 37," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 38(2), pages 1-13, August.
    10. Ventura, Vera & Frisio, Dario G. & Ferrazzi, Giovanni, 2015. "How Scary! An analysis of visual communication concerning genetically modified organisms in Italy," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211921, International Association of Agricultural Economists.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:jloagb:14674. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aeaggea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.