Sunday, July 17, 2016

PR News Analysis Brief- Week 4

Source: Forbes, T. (2016, July 15). Food Companies Rejoice Over House's GMO Compromise Bill. Retrieved July 17, 2016, from http://www.mediapost.com/publications/article/280369/food-companies-rejoice-over-houses-gmo-compromise.html?edition=94671
Summary: On July 14th, the government passed a law requiring foods that contain GMO’s, to be labeled as such.
Heather Haddon from the Wall Street Journal explains, “The bill will require labels to be reworked or updated to show whether any of the ingredients had their natural DNA altered, but will take years to phase in and will give companies the option of using straightforward language, digital codes, or a symbol to be designed later.”
Opinions on the new law vary. Executive director of the Center for Food Safety, Andrew Kimbrell, does not approve and says the new law is “…a non-labeling bill disguised as a labeling bill...” Those with similar opinions think that the bill is a step in the right direction, but just not enough. Giving companies the option to hide behind a QR code or symbol doesn’t provide full discretion to customers.
Others, like Wired writer Sarah Zhang, think the QR codes are a good idea. The QR codes allow for companies to send customers to a linked page, which would provide more information than what would be able to be listed on a normal package.
The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine released a study in May that claimed that GMO foods are safe to eat. MediaPost reported, however, that consumers still want GMO labels.

Importance:
From a PR standpoint, it will be interesting to watch how the various food companies choose to represent themselves. Will consumers stop eating popular foods that contain GMO’s when the information is released, or will the information not have a large effect? Which companies will choose to use a QR code, versus stating the information on the label? Companies that are effected by the new labeling will have to either change recipes, or find new ways to advertise and portray themselves.  Foods that do not contain GMO’s may catch a break. For example, as mentioned in the article, many people believe that square shaped watermelons are genetically modified, but they are really just grown in a box.


Source: Rogers, K. (2016, July 15). What Is a Constant Cycle of Violent News Doing to Us? Retrieved July 17, 2016, from http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/16/health/what-is-a-constant-cycle-of-violent-news-doing-to-us.html?rref=collection/timestopic/Media

Summary:
New York Times just released an article on the effects of the intense media coverage of violence. Psychologist Anita Gadhai- Smith explains that the effects may be split. While some people may be traumatized by the news, others are becoming desensitized.
Additionally, “a team of researchers at the University of Bradford in England told a British psychology conference last year that exposure to violent imagery on social media can cause symptoms that are similar to post-traumatic stress disorder… The study also found that people who view violent events more often were more affected than people who saw them less frequently
Suggests on dealing with the situation include self-limiting your exposure to social media. Other suggestions to deal with the anxiety include maintaining a daily routine and practicing healthy habits.

Importance:

This article shows the impact and influence that the media has. News stations determine what is news-worthy and what is worth reporting. With new technology such as Facebook Live and Twitter videos, profound news is able to spread faster than ever. These platforms do allow for discussion, though. Psychotherapists have been using Facebook Live to help people through the tough situations. 

No comments:

Post a Comment