GMW: Monsanto-sponsored Documentary Stirs Anger

[Guest guest]

GMW: Monsanto-sponsored Documentary Stirs Anger

" GM WATCH " <info

Tue, 23 Aug 2005 20:37:28 +0100

 

 

 

 

GM WATCH daily

http://www.gmwatch.org

------

" I think they can feel confident the program they're sponsoring is not

going to sponsor investigative journalism about genetic engineering or

pesticide use. " - Sheldon Rampton, research director at the Center for

Media and Democracy

------

Corporate-sponsored PBS Documentary Riles Small Farming Advocates

by Christopher Getzan

The New Standard

http://newstandardnews.net/content/?action=show_item & itemid=2262

 

Environment, consumer, agriculture and media watchdogs say the

production of upcoming PBS show America's Heartland exemplifies the

problem of

major corporations driving television journalism.

 

Aug 23 - A new television series set for distribution this fall to

public TV stations across the country is drawing fire from activists who

say its funders exploit a model of factory farming that has profoundly

undermined the same rustic lifestyle the program is meant to showcase.

 

The telecast, America's Heartland, consists of twenty half-hour

episodes produced by PBS affiliate KVIE in Sacramento and is based on a

popular, long-running KVIE broadcast called California Heartland.

While the

bulk of the new national program's underwriting will be provided by the

farming trade group the American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF) and

biotech giant Monsanto, the show is also receiving financial support from

other large farming associations such as the National Cotton Council,

United Soybean Board and the US Grains Council.

 

While the Department of Agriculture noted in 2001 that the vast

majority of farms are still family-run, half of all agricultural sales

were

concentrated among just two percent of farms.

 

Without actually having seen the show, which producers are keeping

under wraps, advocates for family farming and the environment are engaged

in a campaign to dissuade local television stations from running the

series. They cite the main financiers' involvement in technologies and

policies that undermine small farmers as cause for their assumption that

the programming will offer a distorted picture in documentary form.

 

" Our opposition really stems from how they went about finding funding

for the program, " said Chris Cooper, a spokesperson for Global Resource

Action Center for the Environment (GRACE), which has been organizing

around the announcement of the program. " While it might be fine for Exxon

to fund a program on Masterpiece Theatre, it wouldn't be for a

documentary on oil. "

 

More importantly, Cooper said, GRACE believes the pastoral theme of the

program will breed misconceptions about the state of rural life to the

urban and suburban audiences for which the America's Heartland will

likely serve as a primary window into agrarian life in the US.

 

" The problem is that when you're talking about farmers or rural

America, it's impossible to tell an accurate story without telling

about the

role of agribusiness, " said Ben Lilliston, Communications Director at

the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP), " The sponsors of

that program are kind of the spearheads behind the movement for factory

farming. "

 

The number of US farms has been rapidly declining since the 1960s.

While the Department of Agriculture noted in 2001 that the vast

majority of

farms are still family-run, half of all agricultural sales were

concentrated among just two percent of farms.

 

Lilliston said Monsanto and the major farming trade associations " rely

on the mythological view of the farmer to sell their products. "

 

In a letter sent to public television managers about America's

Heartland, 70 groups – including IATP, Public Citizen, Friends of the

Earth,

and the Organic Consumers Association – suggest stations should either

forego showing the series or schedule complementary programming to expose

Heartland as a " piece of propaganda. "

 

The coalition leveled a harsh critique of what it expects the

controversial new series entails.

 

" The destruction of America's rural communities and the disappearance

of its small farmers is an important story that needs to be told, " the

letter reads. " This story, one of rural depopulation, dwindling economic

opportunities, industrial levels of pollution and their attendant

health and social concerns, is the ugly reality of the excesses that come

from the unregulated large-scale industrialized agricultural system

promoted by corporate America. "

 

The signatories say they are concerned that Heartland is " being

produced to put a friendly face on the very forces that are causing these

problems. "

 

They point out that Monsanto and the American Farm Bureau promote

policies that " place the US food supply into the hands of a few major

corporations " by pressuring politicians to keep federal subsidies

flowing to

large agribusinesses.

 

" A significant part of these subsidies then flows directly to Monsanto

from the purchase of genetically modified seed and artificial hormones

to increase milk production at mega-dairies that put small farmers out

of business, " they write.

 

But the documentary's creators say that criticism is premature.

 

Jim O'Donnell, director of program marketing for KVIE, said the only

difference between his station's parent program and the new America's

Heartland spin-off is " geographical coverage. "

 

" The tone, style, and content of the show, the mission of the show, was

well-established in the eight years " it ran on KVIE, said O'Donnell.

" When we contemplated a relationship with Monsanto, KVIE exercised due

diligence and found them to be acceptable to the goals of the show. Their

mission in this is the same thing as the show's. "

 

That mission, according to O'Donnell, is to " educate a non-farm

audience about how food gets from farm to table. It's not an issues-based

show. "

 

GRACE's criticism, O'Donnell said, is baseless for two reasons. First,

he says, California Heartland's educational value is proven by the

large audiences in California's largest, most highly concentrated

urban TV

markets, like San Francisco. Additionally, the farm community's

response to the program was " overwhelmingly positive. "

 

Second, says O'Donnell, is that no one outside of KVIE has actually

seen America's Heartland.

 

" I'm surprised at the criticism, " said O'Donnell. " Nobody's seen the

show " The criticism, he said, " is not based in any factual review of the

program. I don't know how they do it. If you haven't seen the example,

I'm not sure how anybody who has any opinion is basing that in fact. "

 

Monsanto spokesperson Lee Quarles defended the company's involvement in

the funding. " If you look at why we got involved, by far the most

important reason was that farmers wanted their stories to be told, " he

said.

" We recognized we have a role to play because we are in the agriculture

industry. "

 

O'Donnell, Monsanto and the American Farm Bureau Federation refused to

furnish The NewStandard with figures on the funding corporate

big-leaguers are injecting into Heartland, but O'Donnell said the only

" deliverables " returned to Monsanto or AFBF are underwriting credit on

the show.

 

" We have a relationship, clearly, but it doesn't include content, "

O'Donnell said. " We are enjoined in a regulatory manner and a very strict

guideline manner. "

 

O'Donnell said that even Monsanto and the Farm Bureau have only seen

the trailer for America's Heartland. " And certainly, " he said, " Monsanto

and the Farm Bureau would have an interest in a program that would have

an interest to their constituencies, " noting that " the content will

speak for itself. "

 

Cooper acknowledged that GRACE and its partner groups had not seen

America's Heartland yet, but " there's at least the perception the

content's

going to be biased, " he said. " We don't want to come across as

fundamentalists, but it seems to violate the guidelines of [distributors

American Public Television] and PBS. "

 

Lilliston said Monsanto and the major farming trade associations " rely

on the mythological view of the farmer to sell their products, " and

that the big agribusiness firms are using the program to " create this

kind

of sense among the urban audience that they're supporting farmers when

they buy or use " Monsanto products or goods backed by the large trade

councils.

 

Sheldon Rampton, research director at the Center for Media and

Democracy, a media watchdog group, said a series like America's

Heartland can

poison news-gathering at cash-strapped and politically insecure PBS

stations. " The [funders] understand [station programmers] have a limited

news hole, " he said, and " when someone else proposes programming [on a

similar subject], they can say we've already covered that topic. "

 

While the program's underwriters may not exert control over editorial

content, Rampton said he is " sure that Monsanto and company have a

pretty good idea about what shows are going to be broadcast. " He

added, " I

think they can feel confident the program they're sponsoring is not

going to sponsor investigative journalism about genetic engineering or

pesticide use. "

 

Bottom line, Rampton said, " They get their name associated with the

phrase 'America's heartland,' and just by virtue of sponsoring this,

the programming being sponsored fits their vision of the world. "

------------------------------