IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/iefi15/206247.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

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

Author

Listed:
  • Ventura, Vera
  • Frisio, Dario G.

Abstract

The 2010 Eurobarometer on life science and biotechnology reveals an overall suspicion of GM foods amongst the public: the 61% of Europeans agree that GM food makes them feel uneasy and a higher proportion, 70%, think that GM food is fundamentally unnatural. In the economics literature many studies investigate the factors that drive public resistance: ethical concerns, low public trust in regulatory institution, risk misperception, absence of perceived benefits and media bias. In particular, public attitudes and risk perception about agricultural biotechnology are proved to be influenced by press media communication. This paper aims at gaining insight into the visual communication to which Italian population is exposed about GMOs, in order to investigate if images could have contributed to shape their negative public perception. A set of 500 images collected through Google search for “GMO” in Italy are classified considering fearful attributes (i.e. alteration of color, shape or size of plants or animals, mention to death or war, presence of DNA double helix or syringe) and an index that accounts for the scary impact of these images is built. Then the relationship between the index and a set of variables that refer to the context in which images appear is estimated. Preliminary results reveal that the order of appearance of images negatively affect index, namely that the first (and most viewed) Google result pages contain the most frightful images. It suggests that Italian population is subject to overstated negative inputs about GMOs. In addition, it emerges that web contents that show positive or neutral GMO attitudes are barely accompanied with objective and balanced visual communication. Implications and future research are then discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Ventura, Vera & Frisio, Dario G., 2015. "How scary! An analysis of visual communication concerning genetically modified organisms in Italy," 2015 International European Forum (144th EAAE Seminar), February 9-13, 2015, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 206247, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:iefi15:206247
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.206247
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/206247/files/29-Ventura_%20Frisio_proceeding.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.206247?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marks, Leonie A. & Kalaitzandonakes, Nicholas G. & Allison, Kevin & Zakharova, Ludmila, 2003. "Media Coverage Of Agrobiotechnology: Did The Butterfly Have An Effect?," Journal of Agribusiness, Agricultural Economics Association of Georgia, vol. 21(1), pages 1-20.
    2. S.S. Vickner, 2004. "Media Coverage of Biotech Foods and Influence on Consumer Choice," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(5), pages 1238-1246.
    3. McQuarrie, Edward F & Mick, David Glen, 2003. "Visual and Verbal Rhetorical Figures under Directed Processing versus Incidental Exposure to Advertising," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 29(4), pages 579-587, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ventura, Vera & Frisio, Dario G. & Ferrazzi, Giovanni, 2015. "How Scary! An analysis of visual communication concerning genetically modified organisms in Italy," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211921, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. McFadden, Brandon R. & Lusk, Jayson L., 2013. "Effects of Cost and Campaign Advertising on Support for California’s Proposition 37," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 38(2), pages 1-13, August.
    3. Grant Lewison, 2007. "The reporting of the risks from genetically modified organisms in the mass media, 2002–2004," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 72(3), pages 439-458, September.
    4. Miljkovic, Dragan & Mostad, Daniel, 2005. "Impact of Changes in Dietary Preferences on U.S. Retail Demand for Beef: Health Concerns and the Role of Media," Journal of Agribusiness, Agricultural Economics Association of Georgia, vol. 23(2), pages 1-16.
    5. Wu, Laurie & Shen, Han & Fan, Alei & Mattila, Anna S., 2017. "The impact of language style on consumers′ reactions to online reviews," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 590-596.
    6. Morgan, Kimberly L. & Larkin, Sherry L. & Adams, Charles M., 2011. "Empirical analysis of media versus environmental impacts on park attendance," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 852-859.
    7. Peake, Whitney O. & Detre, Joshua D. & Carlson, Clinton C., 2014. "One bad apple spoils the bunch? An exploration of broad consumption changes in response to food recalls," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(P1), pages 13-22.
    8. Yadavalli, Anita & Jones, Keithly, 2014. "Does media influence consumer demand? The case of lean finely textured beef in the United States," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(P1), pages 219-227.
    9. Nicole Darnall & Hyunjung Ji & Kazuyuki Iwata & Toshi H. Arimura, 2022. "Do ESG reporting guidelines and verifications enhance firms' information disclosure?," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(5), pages 1214-1230, September.
    10. Kimberly F. Luchtenberg & Michael J. Seiler & Hua Sun, 2019. "Listing Agent Signals: Does a Picture Paint a Thousand Words?," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 59(4), pages 617-648, November.
    11. Kym Anderson & Gordon Rausser & Johan Swinnen, 2013. "Political Economy of Public Policies: Insights from Distortions to Agricultural and Food Markets," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 51(2), pages 423-477, June.
    12. Moon, Wanki & Rimal, Arbindra & Balasubramanian, Siva K., 2007. "UK Consumers' Willingness-to-Accept (WTA) GM Food," 2007 Annual Meeting, February 4-7, 2007, Mobile, Alabama 34973, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    13. Venkatesh, P. & Sinha, Piyush Kumar, 2008. "An Investigation of Incongruency and Distraction Hypotheses: The Context of Dubbed TV Commercials," IIMA Working Papers WP2008-08-03, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.
    14. Soojung Kim & Jiyang Bae, 2016. "Cross-cultural differences in concrete and abstract corporate social responsibility (CSR) campaigns: perceived message clarity and perceived CSR as mediators," International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 1-14, December.
    15. Johan F.M. Swinnen & Thijs Vandemoortele, 2008. "The Political Economy of Nutrition and Health Standards in Food Markets," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 30(3), pages 460-468.
    16. Haiyan Deng & Ruifa Hu & Carl Pray & Yanhong Jin & Zhonghua Li, 2020. "Determinants of Firm‐Level Lobbying and Government Responsiveness in Agricultural Biotechnology in China," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 37(2), pages 201-220, March.
    17. Caswell, Julie A. & Joseph, Siny, 2007. "Consumer Demand for Quality: Major Determinant for Agricultural and Food Trade in the Future?," Working Paper Series 7390, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Department of Resource Economics.
    18. Heinz, Matthias & Swinnen, Johan, 2015. "Media slant in economic news: A factor 20," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 18-20.
    19. Johnson, Rutherford & Vickner, Steven S. & Pagoulatos, Angelos & Debertin, David L., 2006. "Health Media Coverage and Consumer Choice: A Panel Data Econometric Analysis of the Domestic Cracker Market," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21110, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    20. Varsha Jain & Subhadip Roy & Adwita Pant, 2013. "Effect of colour and relative product size (RPS) on consumer attitudes," Transnational Marketing Journal, Oxbridge Publishing House, UK, vol. 1(1), pages 41-58, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agribusiness;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:iefi15:206247. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ilbonde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.