The Fallacy of Feeding the World?

by Sara Steever
June 10, 2013

What could be more compelling than to contribute directly to feeding hungry people around the world? Well, plenty of things as it would seem. American agriculture’s contributions to the global food supply cannot be understated, yet massive amounts of emotional misinformation guide consumer choices which drive market pressures and legislation that threaten to cripple this productivity.

It seems that feeding the world means very little to Americans not involved in farming.

Agriculture has historically relied on a Dragnet approach to communicating with consumers. Unfortunately, “just the facts” can alienate the very audience we want so much to reach. There is research that can help us understand how the way we present our ideas actually keeps our facts from serious consideration.

Best practices in agriculture are scientifically sound, but the dialogue surrounding genetically modified plants, pesticides, antibiotics, hormones, etc. is often emotional and personal. Our ability to preserve the kind of farming that will fill the nutrition needs of our growing planet hinges on our ability to communicate as a credible, trustworthy minority.

Read “Agvocacy: Winning a War of Words” to learn more about research that is key to building the kind of trust that gives facts a chance.

Creating Content People Care About