Projekt

Media Analysis on the Regulation of Genetically Modified Organisms in Germany

Summary

The debate on the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in agriculture and food production has become one of the most controversial topics in contemporary societies, especially in Europe: Proponents of GM-technology are concerned that the current public controversy on GMOs is impeding the development and commercialization of a new field considered to be of strategic economic importance in Europe. Critics on the other hand, fear unacceptable risks for the environment, health and society.
From 1998 to 2004 no genetically modified plants have been approved for commercialization in the EU. This led to the so-called “de facto moratorium”. To end the moratorium new regulations on genetically modified food and feed as well as on labeling and traceability of GMOs have been developed which came into force in April 2004.
In Europe, the strict policy on the commercialization of GMOs is thought to be partly due to a widespread lack of consumer acceptance. According to a recent study, about 70 % of the consumers do not approve genetically modified food. Many factors have been hypothesized to drive consumer rejection: Concerning the role of the media, it is well known that they do not only reflect the ongoing public debate but they play also a role in shaping it.
In the light of the new EU-regulations on GM food and feed as well as labeling and traceability, we analyzed the media coverage on regulation of biotechnology in five German newspapers (Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ), Frankfurter Rundschau (FR), Süddeutsche Zeitung (SZ), tageszeitung (taz) as well as Die Welt (Welt)). The time period was chosen from May 1, 2003 until April 30, 2004 to cover the discussions on the new EU legislation as well as the end of the de-facto moratorium.
In addition to a quantitative enquiry on the media coverage over this period of time we analyzed the main speakers and the respective frames they are using regarding the regulation of agro-biotechnology.
In total, the media coverage on the regulation of GMOs was well balanced: we collected 1102 statements against gene technology and 1027 statements in favor of it. Nevertheless, an editorial bias could be observed between the different newspapers: While in the FAZ and the Welt statements in favor of gene technology were dominant (64 % and 60%, respectively) the opposite was true for FR (58% against GMOs), taz (56%) and SZ (56%).
When we looked at the speakers, statements made by actors from industry, politics and to a lesser extend from scientists were predominantly in favor of gene technology. Statements against gene technology were expressed by speakers from environment and consumer protection organizations and the agricultural sector. Statements from the media were slightly more against gene technology (284:252).
When we analyzed the frames, we identified 15 different statements which could be used in favor or against gene technology. The dominant frames were “Co-existence” (is possible / is not possible), “labeling” (is adequate / is not adequate) and “impact of GMOs on health/environment” (positive / negative).
The frames most often used in favor of gene technology were “labeling” (adequate), “de facto-moratorium” (negative), “consumer choice” (increased through gene technology) and “German research” (gene technology is necessary).
The frames most often used against gene technology were “consumer acceptance” (negative), “co-existence” (is not possible), “impact on the environment” (negative) and “farmer´s choice” (decreased through gene technology).
Our results show that the complexity of the debate on gene technology is well reflected in the mass media and that .a variety of different social actors are involved nationally and internationally.