London (21st July, 2006) – The response of the print media largely reflected the previous attitudes of the titles to matters involving GM crops and foods.

The Daily Mail first offered a fairly straight report of the DEFRA paper (1), followed the next day by a more critical evaluation (2); a few comments from readers were offered on the website. The Independent (3) vigorously opposed the proposals which paved the way, as they saw it, “for the growing of controversial GM crops on secret sites across the UK.” The “secret sites” follows from the apparent reluctance of DEFRA to publish a “public register” of GM plantings. Thus, the sowing of GM crops would become a ‘secret” affair, just like the sowing of conventional and “organic” crops. The Morning Star joined in with their usual balanced reporting, quoting reactions only from anti-GM campaigners (4).

The Daily Telegraph (5) also highlighted the putative secrecy, a move they reported as being denounced as "irresponsible" by surveyors, who gave warning that it could “blight land and property prices”. Quite why that should happen was not made clear: GM crops approved for commercial planting have been tested as free from toxins and allergens so there would no effect on neighbouring properties. The contrast with grass lawns and meadows is interesting: many people suffer acute hay fever from grass pollens but a sufficiency of grass appears not to blight land and property prices; one wonders why not?

The Evening Standard (6) claimed that ministers were accused of “lax rules” on GM food but failed to state who was making that accusation. The paper also noted that “ministers rejected calls for new laws to safeguard people from pesticides sprayed by farmers” so clearly the Government are indifferent to the perils faced by the populace.

The Guardian (7, 8) offered a fuller account than most of the DEFRA document and provided a number of simple questions and answers, presumably for their younger readers who had not already come across this topic dozens of times in recent years.

All these reports duly quoted from protagonists of both sides of the argument. The anti-GM pressure groups, claiming as always to speak for the public yet having no mandate to do so, said what they always say: catastrophe looms if you don’t do as we demand. Spokesmen for the organic sector, as usual, bewailed what they perceived as threats to their special commercial interests: that “organic” food would disappear if GM crops were to be cultivated in the UK. They have not done so elsewhere, but never mind; it is what they always say on these occasions so why tax the imagination to dream up something new? Nevertheless, in all fairness, most papers did quote voices in favour of GM agriculture, voices both from the biotech. industry and of academic scientists. They, too, spoke as they always speak, voices of reason basing their arguments on facts and reality instead of on make-believe and wish-fulfilment.

The Times (9) managed a hundred words in their “News in brief” column; they, too, highlighted secrecy in the headline and had also been listening to the chartered surveyors expressing their concern for house prices, something, incidentally, they had earlier voiced in 2003 (10). The Financial Times presumably felt their readers would not be interested and ignored the whole shooting match.

The Farmers Weekly (11), as befits a trade paper, simply reported the facts together with a comment from the Government minister.

Finally, broadcasting: the BBC, as always offered a good explanation on their website with a minimum of comment (12), ran a discussion on Farming Today (13) in advance of the DEFRA document’s release and promised another for Saturday, July 22nd.

Sources:

1. Government gives green light to growth of GM crops. Daily Mail (20.7.06) (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=396737&in_page_id=1770&in_page_id=1770&expand=true - c11800976) (N.B. This original article may not longer be available at this URL)

2. Sean Poulter. Government gives green light to growth of GM crops. Daily Mail (21.7.06)
(http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=396737&in_page_id=1770)

3. Andy McSmith. Blair accused of leaving GM-contaminated legacy. The Independent (21.7.06) (http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/article1188880.ece)

4. Britain - activists condemn talks on GM. Morning Star (21.7.06)

5. Charles Clover. Plans to allow GM farming in secret 'are irresponsible'. Daily Telegraph (21.7.06) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/07/21/ngm21.xml

6 . Nicholas Cecil. Ministers accused of lax rules on GM food. Evening Standard (20.7.06)

7 . Mark Oliver. GM plan 'will protect conventional crops'. The Guardian (http://politics.guardian.co.uk/green/story/0,,1825304,00.html)

8 . James Meikle. Ministers pave way for GM crops as 'zero cross-pollination' ruled out; Contamination inevitable, says environment minister; Organic movement angry at disregard for public. The Guardian (http://politics.guardian.co.uk/green/story/0,,1825583,00.html)

9 . Valerie Elliott. News in Brief – GM crops to be grown in secret. The Times (21.7.06) (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2279444,00.html)

10 . Sean Poulter. Blight of GM crops would hit house prices. Daily Mail (4.6.2003) (http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1:102772845/BLIGHT+OF+GM+CROPS+WOULD+HIT+HOUSE+PRICES.html)

11. DEFRA sets GM separation distances. Farmers Weekly. (20.7.06) (http://www.fwi.co.uk/Articles/2006/07/20/96367/DEFRA+sets+GM+separation+distances.html)

12. Proposals for GM crops launched. BBC News (20.7.06) (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/5201196.stm)

13. Listen again (Thursday). BBC Radio – Farming Today. (20.7.06) (http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/news/farmingtoday/index.shtml)

<<<back