How scary! An analysis of visual communication concerning genetically modified organisms in Italy

Effects of Message Presentation Type on GM Food Risk Perception, Similarity Judgment, and Attitude

Media play an important role in communicating scientific and health-related information, in turn, influencing audience risk perception. This study examined how genetically modified (GM) food news' presentation types - text-only, addition of photographs, or addition of infographics - can affect risk perception and attitude towards GM foods. Further, individuals' healthy eating involvement and perceived threat to GM foods were considered as individual difference variables influencing the level of perceived relevance to the GM food news. Results showed that news with infographics generally lowered risk perception and led individuals to perceive GM and non-GM foods more similarly in their safety on allergy, genetic changes, and organ toxicity.

Food to politics: Representations of genetically modified organisms in cartoons on the Internet in China

Controversies around genetically modified (GM) food have become particularly prevalent in China. To understand the situation, 257 GM cartoons were collected from various Chinese online sources. We found that China's GM cartoons peaked during controversial social events from the end of 2012 to 2016, which is consistent with the Baidu Media Index on GM headline news. About 85% of the cartoons involve GM food and more than half of cartoons share scary information. The mainstream media is more neutral and not only presents the dilemma in choice but also promotes genetically modified organisms (GMOs). However, social media inclines toward a more pessimistic view, providing scary information and focusing on health risks and conspiracy theories. Controversial topics have fueled the spread of political conspiracy theories. Generally, scientists supporting GMOs have been criticized under suspicion of betraying their country, and the issue of GM food in China reflects strong political views.

Is Opposition to Genetically Modified Food "Morally Absolutist"? A Consequence-Based Perspective

Genetically modified foods (GMFs) have met with strong opposition for most of their existence. According to one account-the consequence-based perspective (CP)-lay people oppose GMFs because they deem them unsafe as well as of dubious value. The CP is backed by the data and offers a clear solution for easing GMF opposition. However, several scholars have claimed that the CP is faulty, that lay opposition derives from largely nonrational factors and is consequence blind. One recent statement of this, the moral-absolutism perspective (MAP), contends that GMFs' opponents are principled "moral absolutists" who think that GMFs should be banned no matter their value or risk. Herein we critically weigh key arguments for this proposal. We also present five new studies that probed the clearest data that seem to favor the MAP-opponents affirming the statement that GMFs should be "prohibited," no matter their value or risk. These studies jointly show that (a) most presumed absolutists do not understand the key question and/or (b) cannot validly answer it. We show that taking due steps in clarifying the question and screening for those participants who cannot validly answer it cuts down absolutism to near zero. Finally, we demonstrate that helping GMFs' opponents imagine a world wherein GMFs are safe and constructive makes the majority willing to welcome GMFs in this context.

Distinguishing scientific knowledge: The impact of different measures of knowledge on genetically modified food attitudes

The impact of knowledge on public attitudes toward scientific issues remains unclear, due in part to ill-defined differences in how research designs conceptualize knowledge. Using genetically modified foods as a framework, we explore the impacts of perceived familiarity and factual knowledge, and the moderating roles of media attention and a food-specific attitudinal variable (food consciousness), in shaping these relationships. Based on the differential effects on "negative attitudes" toward genetically modified foods, we provide further evidence that the measures of knowledge are separate concepts and argue against a one-dimensional view of scientific knowledge. We discuss implications for understanding the relationship between knowledge and science attitudes.

Framing genetically modified mosquitoes in the online news and Twitter: Intermedia frame setting in the issue-attention cycle

We investigate how the online news and Twitter framed the discussion about genetically modified mosquitoes, and the interplay between the two media platforms. The study is grounded in the theoretical frameworks of intermedia agenda setting, framing, and the issue-attention cycle and combines methods of manual and computational content analysis, and time series analysis. The findings show that the Twitter discussion was more benefit-oriented, while the news coverage was more balanced. Initially, Twitter played a leading role in framing the discussion about genetically modified mosquitoes. When the public learned about the issue, online news gained momentum and led the Twitter publics to discuss the risks of genetically modified mosquitoes. Based on the findings, we argue that the intermedia frame setting may change its direction over time, and different media outlets may be influential in leading different aspects of the conversation.