Turning the GM Battleship: The Tide of Popular Opinion and the Future of Genetically Modified Foods

  • James E. McWilliamsEmail author
Part of the Biotechnology in Agriculture and Forestry book series (AGRICULTURE, volume 67)


GMOs have had a bad run in the popular media lately. The persistently negative portrayals are unfortunate for many reasons, but most notably because the transgenic technology has the potential to accomplish a number of critical humanitarian and environmental objectives, often ones espoused by those who oppose GMOs. This essay explores the deeper nature of the popular media’s and general public’s failure to grasp and present the benefits of GMOs with scientific accuracy and a sense of objectivity that both the media and public claim to seek. Building on this analysis, it then examines the matter of how corporations and scientists might better convey their message, exploring the potential of third-party verifiers and labeling initiatives to alleviate much of the public’s mistrust of transgenic technology. In the end, there is substantial evidence that the “problem” with GMOs does not inhere in the medium but the message.


Agricultural Biotechnology Genetically Modify Food Transgenic Technology Food Movement Monarch Butterfly 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Academics Review (2010) Jeffery Smith: False claims unsupported by science.
  2. Brainard C (2008) “Can GM crops solve the food crisis: UCS says journalists overstate potential for higher yields.” Columbia J Rev July 21, 2008:
  3. Cook G (2006) ’Words of mass destruction’: British newspaper coverage of the genetically modified food debate, expert and non-expert reactions. Publ Understand Sci 15(5):5–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Degnan FH (2000) Biotechnology and the food label: a legal perspective. Food Drug Law J 55(3):301–310PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Fedoroff N (1999) Mendel in the kitchen: a scientist’s view of genetically modified foods. Joseph Henry Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  6. Friedman S (2009) Fresh: a perishable history. Harvard University Press, Boston, MAGoogle Scholar
  7. McWilliams JE (2009) Just food: where Locavores get it wrong and how we can truly eat responsibly. Little Brown, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  8. Miller M (2004) Americans’ opinions about genetically modified foods remain divided, but majority want a strong regulatory system. In Pew Charitable Trusts.
  9. Mnookin S (2010) The panic virus: a true story of medicine, science, and fear. Simon and Schuster, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  10. Mooney C (2009) Unscientific America: how scientific illiteracy threatenes our future. Basic Books, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  11. Munro WA, Shurman RA (2008) Sustaining outrage: cultural capital, strategic location, and motivating sensibilities in the U.S. Anti-genetic engineering movement. In: Wright W, Middendorf G (eds) The fight over food: producers, consumers, and activists challenge the global food system. Penn State Press, State College, PAGoogle Scholar
  12. Pollan M (2008) In defense of food: an eater’s Manifesto. Penguin Press, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  13. Poortinga W, Pidgeon N (2007) Public perceptions of agricultural biotechnology in the UK: the case of genetically modified food. In: Brossard D, Shanahan J, Nesbitt TC (eds) The media, the public, and agricultural biotechnology. CAB International, WallingfordGoogle Scholar
  14. Pornpitakpan C (2004) The persuasiveness of source credibility: a critical review of five decades’ evidence. J Appl Soc Psych 34:243–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Roe B, Tiesl MF (2007) Genetically modified food labeling: the impacts of message and messenger on consumer perceptions of labels and products. Food Policy 32:49–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ronald P, Adamchak R (2008) Tomorrow’s table: organic farming, genetics, and the future of food. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  17. Rousu M, Huffman WE, Shogren JF, Tegene A (2007) Effects and value of verifiable information in a controversial market: evidence from lab auctions of genetically modified food. Econ Inq 45(3):409–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Specter M (2009) Denialism: how irrational thinking hinders scientific progress, harms the planet, and threatens our lives. Penguin, New York, NYGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Texas State UniversitySan MarcosUSA

Personalised recommendations