“Although I’ve had a lot of tough interviews in my day, that was definitely the toughest and most unique interview experience of my career,” Boyle said. “I was honored to play straight man to the hilarious Stephen Colbert and to demonstrate that while meat processing is serious business, we can be good sports.” AMI reports that Boyle’s interview with the comedian was two hours long, edited down to a four minute segment for the show.
Colbert’s intro to the interview features him “pledging allegiance” to a bacon flag: “I pledge allegiance to the meat of the United Steaks of America. And to the ribeye for which it broils, one bacon under God, with liver and onions for all!”
Chomping down on a huge turkey leg, Colbert confounds Boyle with questions like, “At what point will the AMI say ’stop America, that’s the perfect amount of meat’?” and “Who’s pooping on our meat?” Colbert’s pièce de résistance comes when he asks (hypothetically, of course) if AMI would endorse the eating of people if there were no more animals. “The American Meat Institute would not support a policy of cannibalism,” says Boyle with a straight face. “We would not recommend humans for human consumption.”
Tongue planted firmly in cheek, it is pretty darn funny.
Every so often you come across a single well turned phrase that you wish had come out of your own mouth. I did so this morning while checking out a blog in the Los Angeles Times regarding the latest over-blown information purporting links between fructose sweetener and cancer.
Tami Dennis, health and science editor of the Los Angeles Times wrote the article about the recent UCLA study linking HFCS to the spread of pancreatic cancer contending that it could be an “overstatement.”
But the best line from the piece is a cutline under a lab photo accompanying her blog which said: “The road between a lab experiment and public policy is long. Or it should be.”
Wow! Words to live by. The UCLA hype is just the latest effort to take a free-standing nugget of information and attempt to pawn it off as scientific gospel akin to Galileo’s observation that gravity works.
Dennis cites the blog Respectful Insolence in her argument. “I hate science press releases that hype a study beyond its importance. I hate it even more when the investigators who published the study make statements not justified by the study and use the study as a jumping off point to speculate wildly.”
She is right on in her assessment. However, the problem is the UCLA news release got huge national exposure, fructose got another undeserved whack, and a small percentage of people who read the original news story will ever see the much lower profile condemnations of this shoddy approach to research.
Gilbert Ross, M.D., Executive Director and Medical Director of the American Council on Science and Health had a similar reaction to the UCLA gambit saying, “Both the authors and the press need to retract these alarmist and unsupported claims — especially the authors, since such gross over-interpretation of a lab study is inexcusable among academic scientists. They seem to be grasping for headlines and promoting some anti-fructose political agenda.”
For more background on this issue you might want to check out a much more thoughtful piece here.
There is always a danger in the media reporting on scientific studies as if they were a new Gospel – which is what they tend to do, with the blessing of the scientists involved, of course – since more publicity means more grant money to do more studies. The problem is that scientific research can’t just be boiled down to a headline or a sound bite that explains it all, without being totally misleading – and one single study does not a new truth make. Such is the case with a study out of UCLA’s Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center publicized this week linking high fructose corn syrup to cancer growth.
The sensationalized headlines are all many people will actually read about this study. “Fructose: The Sugar of Choice for Cancer Cells” and “Cancer Cells Slurp Up Fructose, Study Finds” are two of the examples – one from AOL News and one from Reuters. The more medical among the media get a little more detailed, noting that the study involved pancreatic cells in particular – which is an important detail because not all cancer cells are created equal.
You can’t entirely blame the media, since stories tend to come from press releases, which are written to get publicity. If they happen to be about a high profile social issue, like high fructose corn syrup, they tend to get more attention. As part of the press release on the study, author Dr. Anthony Heaney says that because of his research, a federal effort should be launched to reduce refined fructose intake. “I think this paper has a lot of public health implications,” Heaney said. “Hopefully, at the federal level there will be some effort to step back on the amount of HFCS in our diets.”
As a voice crying out in the wilderness, the Corn Refiners Association issued its own press release in response to the study to point out some of the premature and potentially misleading conclusions made by both the researchers and the media. One major point they make is that it is a big leap to “extrapolate the results of laboratory research on pure fructose to real-world conditions.”
This study does not look at the way fructose is actually consumed by humans, as it was conducted in a laboratory, not inside the human body. The study also narrowly compared pure fructose to pure glucose, neither of which is consumed in isolation in the human diet. Humans consume a wide array of foods that contain both fructose and glucose in combination along with many other sugars and nutrients. Most notably, both sugar (sucrose) and high fructose corn syrup contain roughly 50 percent glucose and 50 percent fructose.
It is also significant to note that it is difficult to pinpoint any one cause for any cancer – even smoking, since some people can smoke two packs a day for 50 years and die of old age while some who have never smoked a single cigarette get lung cancer. As the Corn Refiners put it, “To blame one component of the diet is highly speculative based on one, small study done in a Petri dish.”
In yesterday’s blog I briefly discussed the phenomenon of editorials on an identical subject suddenly showing up in newspapers across the country almost like a flu epidemic had simultaneously hit newsrooms nationwide.
The most recent attack on corn-based ethanol provides a great example of how these coordinated efforts are staged. The current outbreak, which began Sunday, hit the nation’s top tier opinion leaders on Sunday and Monday and began showing up in large regional daily newspapers like the Des Moines Register and the Columbus Dispatch the last two days. Many local papers can be expected to jump on the passing train by week’s end bringing yet another 6 day ethanol drubbing to an end.
Editorials like this don’t happen in a vacuum, especially the main Op-ed pieces with no names attached because they represent the “official opinion” of the newspaper. In fact most editorial writers rarely leave the paper to venture into the real world to form their very articulate opinions.
Most sit in their secluded offices each day and read others opinions, research the internet and read other papers trolling for ideas. However, most also hold court each day where the powerful and the influential come calling with their hat in their hand and try to persuade the editor to write a piece reflecting their position.
If you happen to work at a large East Coast news outlet you have a tremendous amount of power because these folks generally start all news cycles and take the lead on deciding which issues get ink or airtime. Some people (yes, I know a few) make a good living professionally coaching CEOs in business and even government officials on how to best present and sell their message. Most have a news background and they use their contacts to grant attain access for others and grease the skids for their client.
Why would someone go to such great lengths and even spend huge sums on Public Relations/Public Affairs companies to help them hone their talking points and put together professional information packets? Because if you hit a home run with someone like the Wall Street Journal or the Washington Post, competing editors elsewhere will scramble to get something out as soon as possible and hope nobody notices they didn’t have it first. A sort of race begins. In this race it is ok to be second or even third but just like in the Olympics…nobody cares who got fourth place. (more…)
If you have watched any of the World Cup soccer tournament, you no doubt heard that incessant sound make by blowing the noisemakers known as “vuvuzelas” that were popularized by South African soccer fans. The plastic blowing horns produce a loud, distinctive monotone note that some people say sounds like the constant droning of a huge swarm of bees.
Critics of corn – whether it be ethanol, sweetener, or just farming in general – can sometimes sound like the constant droning of vuvuzelas, churning out the same old tired arguments in a loud, distinctive monotone. Looking through my Google alerts for ethanol over the holiday weekend I found a number of articles and blog postings that use those vuvuzela-type arguments. When the stories offer a place for comments, I always look to see what is being said and may offer some comment of my own to try and break through that monotony.
About a dozen corn grower states recently got some social media training by AgChat expert Michele Payn-Knoper. While much of that training focuses on how you can use social media tools like Facebook, YouTube and Twitter to tell the positive story of agriculture to the general public, it also involves taking the initiative to set the record straight when you see agriculture being attacked in on-line stories. It has never been any easier to provide your own editorial comments than it is today with stories found on-line. No printing or stamps involved, no letters to mail, no gatekeeper (in most cases) to edit or silence your point of view. There may be moderation for some comments (which is highly encouraged, if you have or want to start your own blog) but usually comments are approved. The moderation is mainly to prevent spam comments from getting through.
My point is – make some of your own noise! The articles I saw had NO opposing viewpoints from corn growers or their advocates. Take some time once a week to browse through on-line articles that are critical of farming or ethanol or corn products and make your voice heard. Sign up for Google alerts for corn, farming or ethanol so you know what is being said and respond. The forum is there, we need to utilize it.
If you haven’t already tuned into the new level of activism in agriculture, especially regarding misinformation on our largest industry, then you won’t find better evidence of this evolving cultural phenomenon than the Corn Farmers Coalition.
Speaking to a couple of family farmers recently they expressed their frustration at the misinformation, innuendo and outright fabrications that are being used to frame their chosen profession. As upset as they were, there was also a prevalent sense that there was nothing they could do to change things.
If you are frustrated and tired of all the attacks and negative news swirling around agriculture you have come to the right place. Read slowly, soak this up, and then if you are a corn farmer give yourself a big pat on the back.
Imagine 60,000 city people getting a positive message about farmers every day. As they go to and from work, go out for dinner, go to a movie, or just go about their life in general. Next imagine that most of these people are employed in jobs on or near Capitol Hill in Washington, DC…Congressmen, staffers, agency employees, lobbyists, environmental groups, and even media. That’s what is happening right now as you read this thanks to the efforts of farmers themselves.
In the attached photo of the Union Station Metro stop in Washington, DC you can see several of the ads that will be prevalent throughout June and July as part of CFC’s efforts. From the highly trafficked Metro system, to Reagan National Airport, to the most widely read political publications like Politico and Congressional Quarterly. Throw in on-line advertising at the aforementioned publications, WashingtonPost.com, National Public Radio, ads in the Washington Nationals baseball team programs, and a smattering of talk, sports, and contemporary radio and you begin to get a feel for the breadth and scope of this campaign. It is conservatively estimated the educational campaign will create more than 10 million positive impressions in the land of policy and regulation.
Equally as impressive is that CFC, and the $1 million in corn checkoff funds backing the campaign, comes straight from family farmers in Maryland, Virginia, Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, Iowa, Wisconsin, South Dakota, Nebraska, Colorado, Kansas and Michigan who believe we need to introduce a foundation of facts to the dialogue in Washington.
Ten messages based on USDA and EPA facts will be used in the campaign to show tech-savvy, innovative farmers are growing more corn every year – for food, animal feed, ethanol and exports – while using fewer resources and protecting the environment.
The coalition will meet with media, members of Congress, environmental groups and others to talk about what’s ahead: how U.S. farmers, using the latest technologies, will continue to expand yields and how this productivity can be a bright spot in an otherwise struggling economy.
We have a great story to tell so take heart. You can make a difference and CFC offers clear evidence.
I have always been a fan of dolphins but after last night’s Oscars I am an even bigger fan. That’s because in the best Documentary Feature category Food Inc., the diatribe against American agriculture, got a good old fashioned smack down by The Cove.
The Cove” follows animal activist Richard O’Barry — who once trained dolphins for the television show “Flipper” — alongside a team of filmmakers as they attempt to document dolphin slaughter in the Japanese fishing village of Taiji.
Food Inc. shows filmmaker Robert Kenner attempting to slaughter American ranchers and family farmers and send us all running back to backyard gardens and 1900’s vintage farms. He shows us the worst examples of how livestock is raised in this country and also wants us to question the healthiness of corn in our food supply.
Food Inc. is clearly a piece of “food advocacy work” rather than honest journalism, according to Dan Glickman and he ought to know. The current chairman of the Motion Picture Association of American is a former U.S. Secretary of Agriculture under President Bill Clinton. (Maybe someone should do a documentary on how the Ag Secretary makes the pilgrimage from DC to Hollywood. Now that would at least be interesting.)
Family corn farmers represented by the National Corn Growers Association lashed out at Food Inc. in advance of last night’s festive event saying the documentary shouldn’t win the Oscar because it not only grossed out grocery shoppers, but was unfair to the nation’s farmers.
The dictionary says the noun documentary describes a film or TV program presenting the facts about a person or event. Kenner’s propaganda clearly should have never made it to the red carpet.
Perhaps now we can relegate Food Inc. to collect dust on the back shelves of video stores where it belongs and farmers can go back to producing the safest and most abundant food supply in the world.
As Mark noted in the previous post, last week was the annual National Association of Farm Broadcasting Trade Talk. There is probably no event like this in any industry where representatives from over 150 companies and organizations get to interact with about the same number of farm broadcast reporters walking around doing interviews in a six hour period. Most broadcasters come away with between 15 and 30 interviews that come in especially handy over the holiday season! Pictured here at the National Corn Growers Association booth are Mark on the left, and Joel Heitkamp with KFGO in Fargo, ND preparing to interview NCGA First Vice President Bart Schott of North Dakota.
One of the major topics of interest at Trade Talk was the late harvest, and even though North Dakota’s corn harvest was still in the single digits last week, Bart expressed optimism about the crop. “If we get a few more weeks of really nice weather, we’ll get this corn crop off in good shape,” he said. Despite the problems this year, he says the crop continues to look good and is still expected to be the second largest on record, “If there’s ever been a debate about whether we can produce enough corn feed our exports, livestock industry and ethanol industry, this will be the second year in a row that we’ve proved them wrong.”
Listen to my interview with Bart here – one of the dozens NCGA reps did last week with farm broadcasters – and podcasters!
Jon Stewart’s “The Daily Show” may not be a “real” news show, but the lighter side takes itself seriously enough to have big name political guests and do semi-serious interviews with them.
Such was the case this week when former Vice President Al Gore appeared on the show to promote his new book “Our Choice” about how we can solve the “climate crisis.” During the interview, Stewart said that making choices to help the environment can be confusing for people. “We were told ethanol was the answer, turns out that’s worse for the environment,” Stewart said. The former VP, who supported corn-based ethanol while in office, did little to defend the fuel in response to that statement. “Yeah, but the new forms of ethanol that they’re coming up with now actually are not bad for the environment and we can switch to the new kinds that will be much better,” Gore said.
Renewable Fuels Association President and CEO Bob Dinneen says that short exchange highlights a disturbing trend in ethanol misinformation. “Failing to understand the issue and continuing to propagate factually inaccurate information, even on a faux news show, is dangerous and undermines the legitimate debate about our energy future,” said Dinneen. “This trend in statements by prominent and influential individuals is leaving the American people with a false set of choices about the various roles of renewable energy across the board.”
Dinneen extended “an open invitation for Mr. Gore to visit any of the nation’s ethanol facilities and to attend the industry’s annual conference next February in Orlando, Florida.” No response from the VP yet.
Host and chief national correspondent John King visited the farm of Neale Shaner in Fort Calhoun, and the Advanced BioEnergy ethanol plant in Fairmont, where he stood on a mound of dried distillers grains with ABE Plant Manager Grant Johanson. Here’s a taste of the article:
Watching their 12-row combine harvest the corn is a sight to behold, methodically scooping ears from the fields and dramatically increasing productivity. This corn won’t end up on a dinner table but instead at a giant Cargill plant just up the road, where it is processed into ethanol and several corn byproducts.
In Washington, ethanol is a source of controversy, with many lawmakers arguing it is an industry unfairly propped up by generous federal subsidies. To Nebraska, however, it is the direct source of roughly 1,000 jobs at ethanol production plants across the state, many of them located in small towns where those 40 to 50 plant jobs are the local gold standard.
American Meat Institute (AMI) President J. Patrick Boyle was the main dish on comedian Stephen Colbert’s “Know Your Lobby” segment, which profiles lobbying organizations. 
The sensationalized headlines are all many people will actually read about this study. 
If you have watched any of the 
As Mark noted in the previous post, last week was the annual 
Such was the case this week when former 
Host and chief national correspondent John King visited the farm of Neale Shaner in Fort Calhoun, and the Advanced BioEnergy ethanol plant in Fairmont, where he stood on a mound of dried distillers grains with ABE Plant Manager Grant Johanson. Here’s a taste of the article: