Entry#3 Slanted Reporting on GMOs
What is Slanted Reporting? This is reporting which is biased, takes
directions or sides. Slanted
publications are those which leave out or emphasize purposely certain facts in the
information being presented with the idea to convince the audience of their
point of view. We, as consumers, get used to this kind of reporting in the news
world. It is almost impossible for me to think of a news channel or newspaper
which does not lean toward one side of the political spectrum than the other. It
is very rear today to hear unbiased journalism where a balance of both
viewpoints is presented. I came across slanted reporting when
I worked on a project about GMOs pros and cons. When people discuss a topic
which concerns our health, they get emotional and take sides. In the discussion
of any controversy in our society we would definitely see slanted reporting.
What are GMOs?
GMOs, or “genetically modified organisms,” are plants or animals
created through the gene splicing techniques of biotechnology (also called
genetic engineering).This experimental technology
merges DNA from different species, creating unstable combinations of plant,
animal, bacterial and viral genes that cannot occur in nature or in traditional
crossbreeding. According to the nonprofit Center
for Food Safety, GMO seeds are used to plant 90 percent of corn, soybeans, and
cotton grown in the U.S. These products find their way into
many of our foods, from our morning toast, to our salad, to the cookies we
snack on at night.
Here is how GMOs are presented as
something very safe for the consumers to use in a show called:“TheBalancingAct.
Why people get so concern about the use of GMOs in our food
since they are harmless?
Environmental Risks: Seventy-two percent
of US GMO crops are engineered to tolerate a certain type of herbicide. But the
weeds that these herbicides used to kill are coming back bigger and stronger,
creating herbicide-resistant “super weeds” that require greater
quantities of more toxic pesticides to eradicate. Even
when a farmer isn't growing
GM crops, contamination can easily occur—through seed mixing or pollen
drift from neighboring GM fields. It can be an economic disaster for organic
and family farmers.
Human Health Risks: More and more studies
point to the idea that there’s grave cause for concern about the health effects
of consuming GMOs and the chemicals they are sprayed with, including
food allergies, irritable bowels, organ damage, and cancer.
I found another slanted report that tried to convince the
public that these studies did not prove any harmful effects of GMOs on people. Layla Katiraee says in an article,”10 studies proving GMOs are harmful? Not if science matters” that “none of these studies proves or even persuasively suggests that GMOs can be harmful to human health. The majority are either obviously flawed or are not scientific studies.”
On the other specter of the debate about the GMOs, I came across an interview: “Fox News Shockingly Reports the Truth on GMOs”, which shows the dangerous health consequences of consuming GMO containing food.
Since the public could not get a definite answer about the
health risks of consuming GMOs and the laws are not changing fast enough, the consumers decided to ask about labeling of the GMO foods.
In USA some states do require labels.
In May 2014, Vermont became the first to pass a law that
requires labels on any foods produced entirely or partially with genetic
engineering. Maine and Connecticut are
also on their way, but bills that mandate GMO labels can only take effect until
related bills are passed, which could take years. GMO
labeling legislation is pending in 28 other states, according to
the National Conference of State Legislatures.
Now the debate is really heating up. A 14 year
old Rachel Parent, GMO activist and
founder of “Kids’ Right to Know” has been bullied from the T.V. reporter on Canadian Biotechnology Action Network:
www.cban.ca
While Rachel was presenting her point of view on labeling of
GMO foods, she was accused by the T.V. host of being “anti science”. It is amazing
how this 14 year old girl was able to prove her point of view with such grace while being “pressed to
the wall” by our millionaire Kevin O’Leary who was very “concern” about the
food supply of third world countries if the business of Monsanto (the biggest monopole
in our food industry) is decreased. She stated that she is for “responsible
science and ethical progress”. Rachel was
accused from the T.V. hostess as being unreasonable as would a "passionate 14 years
old” would be for the simple reason of asking the food industry to put labels on our
food, to show us which food contain GMOs,
so we, as consumers can take informed decisions.
No comments:
Post a Comment