{"id":11408,"date":"2000-01-06T20:28:56","date_gmt":"2000-01-06T20:28:56","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/wordpress.library.illinois.edu\/funkaces\/?p=11408"},"modified":"2018-03-06T20:41:02","modified_gmt":"2018-03-06T20:41:02","slug":"acdc-news-issue-00-12","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/wordpress.library.illinois.edu\/funkaces\/acdc-news-issue-00-12\/","title":{"rendered":"ACDC News \u2013 Issue 00-12"},"content":{"rendered":"

“If<\/a>\u00a0I were the queen of labels.”<\/b><\/h3>\n

That\u2019s the arresting title of an article by Jane M. Thomas in the May 2000 issue of Agrichemical and Environmental News from Washington State University. And her follow-up is just as engrossing as she buzzes bravely into the beehive of pesticide labeling policy. As coordinator of the Pesticide Notification Network, Thomas reviews hundreds of pesticide labels. Noting that the U.S. has no rules with regard to pesticide labels, she proceeds to outline a slate of new rules that she would establish if she were “queen of labels.” Into her light-touch treatment, she weaves thoughtful discussion and specific suggestions about how to address this serious, complex challenge in risk communications.<\/p>\n

Reference: Use title search (above) for the full citation. Article is posted online at http:\/\/www2.tricity.wsu.edu\/aenews\/May00AENews\/May00AENews.htm<\/a><\/p>\n

\n

Using<\/a>\u00a0comics in development<\/b>.<\/h3>\n

If you\u2019d like to examine ways in which to fit drama and humor into information campaigns, you may be interested in this new reference from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Finland:<\/p>\n

Comics with an attitude: a guide to the use of comics\u00a0<\/i>in development information<\/i><\/p>\n

This 14-page reference describes the special capabilities of comics, summarizes techniques for using them effectively and offers case examples.
\nReference: Use title search (above) for the full citation. Reference is posted online at http:\/\/global.finland.fi\/comics\/index.htm<\/a><\/p>\n

\n

Invisible<\/a>\u00a0barrier<\/b>.<\/h3>\n

A recent report from the Human Development Report Office of the United Nations Development Programme highlights problems in the use of new information technologies for development. The paper suggests that an invisible barrier has emerged – a barrier that, “true to its name, is like a world wide web, embracing the connected and silently, almost imperceptibly, excluding the rest.” It cites statistics that illustrate gaps among countries, in terms of Internet access and use. And it concludes that “market forces alone will not rectify the imbalance.”<\/p>\n

Reference: Use title search (“New technologies and the global race for knowledge”) for the full citation.<\/p>\n

\n

Jousting<\/a>\u00a0among food information sources<\/b>.<\/h3>\n

Media personnel and others are being alerted to credibility issues as new food information centers appear online. A recent example in Canada involves a press release from a health-advocacy organization contending that a food information council in that country is “hiding the fact that it is sponsored by major food corporations.”<\/p>\n

Reference: Use title search (“Canadian Food Information Council: wolf in sheep\u2019s clothing”) for the full citation.<\/p>\n

\n

And<\/a>\u00a0differing slants on results of those public attitude studies<\/b>.<\/h3>\n

News media also report many studies these days about public attitudes toward biotechnology and food safety. Such studies are based on a variety of survey methods, some more sound than others. And even the statistically rigorous studies are open to “selective spin” by interest groups that cite the results.<\/p>\n

Take, for example, a survey during May 2000 among a probability sample of U.S. consumers. It is the most recent in a series of similar surveys related to food biotechnology. Advocates of GMO foods can view the results and conclude that consumer attitudes regarding food biotechnology are increasingly positive. This conclusion is based, for example, on findings that (compared with last fall) consumers seem somewhat more likely to buy produce that has been enhanced to taste better or fresher. However, critics of GMO foods can cite findings reported in the same study that (compared with a year ago) consumers seem less likely to buy such produce.<\/p>\n

Reference: Use title search (“U.S. consumer attitudes toward food biotechnology”) for the full citation.<\/p>\n

\n

Some<\/a>\u00a0other recent studies about public attitudes toward GM food<\/b>:<\/h3>\n