As noted in Chapter 2, Section 2.12, previous research, both quantitative and qualitative, has found that newspaper sources included in the coverage of GM or biotechnology stories have had a predominately positive bias towards GM or biotechnology. One of the questions for this research was whether this pro-GM tone was evident amongst the news sources used in the New Zealand newspaper coverage of the GM debate. As already outlined in Chapter 3, Section 3.2.8.2 source citations were read and coded according to whether or not the source citation was pro, anti, neutral or undisclosed with regard to its position on GM. Table 8 below illustrates the analysis of news source citations with regard to stances they took towards GM.
110
Table 8. Percentage of GM Bias of Source Citations by Source Types
Source Type GM Stance Total
Pro–GM Anti-GM Neutral Scientists 14.9% (n=329) 2.5% (n=55) 4.7% (n=104) 22.1% (n=488) Industry spokespeople 10.7% (n=236) 2.9% (n=64) 5.8% (n=127) 19.4% (n=427) Policy makers 4.0% (n=89) 7.0% (n=153) 19.5% (n=431) 30.5% (n=673) Religious spokespeople 0.1% (n=3) 0.4% (n=9) 0.9% (n=21) 1.4% (n=33) Māori spokespeople 0.3% (n=6) 1.8% (n=40) 0.4% (n=9) 2.5% (n=55)
Health and disease groups 1.7%
(n=38) 0.1% (n=3) 0.2% (n=5) 2.0% (n=46) Environment/Animal welfare groups 0.05% (n=1) 2.55 (n=57) 1.0% (n=21) 3.6% (n=79) Regulatory authorities 0.05% (n=1) 0 3.65% (n=80) 3.7% (n=81) Lobby groups 2.75 (n=61) 4.2% (n=92) 1.25% (n=28) 8.2% (n=181)
Royal Commission members 0.6%
(n=14) 0 2.7% (n=58) 3.3% (n=72) Legal 0 0.1% (n=2) 1.3% (n=28) 1.4% (n=30) Other 0.2% (n=4) 0.5% (n=12) 1.2% (n=25) 1.9% (n=41) Totals 35.35% (n=782) 22.05% (n=487) 42.6% (n=937) 100.0% (n=2206)
111
The above table illustrates that just over 40% of all cited sources had a neutral position on GM. The next largest group of source citations were in favour of GM at just over 35%. Source citations against GM reached slightly higher than 22% of all citations.
As shown in Table 8, when analysed in terms of news source types, the citations from scientists (14.9%) and industry spokespeople (10.7%) were the most in favour of GM. No other news source type had citations in favour of GM above 5%. Policy makers (7.0%) and lobby groups (4.2%) were the news source types most likely to have citations opposing GM. No other news source type had citations opposed to GM above 4%. Policy makers (19.5%) had the largest percentage of citations displaying a neutral position with regard to GM. Industry sources (5.8%) were the other group most likely to have citations with a neutral position towards GM. Citations illustrating a neutral position from other news source types did not reach over 5% of all citations
As shown, the majority of citations had a neutral position on GM, with policy makers having the largest number of such citations. This result probably indicates the highly political nature of the debate with some groups being reluctant to take a particular position before the outcome of the Royal Commission of Inquiry. However, scientists and industry spokespeople were strongly in favour of GM, arguing they had no reluctance in stating their position. The implications of these findings will be discussed in the next chapter.
As described in Chapter 3.8.2.2, the second way in which the value stance of source citations was measured was by reading each source citation to ascertain whether they had a pro, anti, or neutral value stance towards the sub-theme under discussion. The results of this analysis describe the overall value stances taken by different source types on the sub-themes discussed in the reportage examined.
Following the structure outlined in section 4.4, the value stance of source citations towards particular sub-themes are only reported if they reached 5% or more of all source citations in a given stage. The full results of this analysis are contained in Appendix 4.
Following the order set out above in section 4.2.6.1 the first statistics presented are of the value stance of source citations concerned with Science sub-themes. Citations concerning the GM science sub-theme were nearly evenly split between those in favour of it (39.7%) and those with a neutral position (40.5%). The news sources types with the majority of
112
favourable citations towards GM science were scientists and industry spokespersons. Citations from policy makers were mixed, with 5.7% positive citations, negative citations 6.0% and neutral citations at 6.5%. Lobby groups had the next highest percentage of citations on GM science, with most, 6.5% holding a negative value stance on the sub-theme. These results seem to reflect those reported earlier, with scientists and industry spokespeople taking a positive position towards GM science. The split between policy makers may reflect the political divide between the Green Party and others. The negative position of lobby groups indicates that these citations were dominated by citations from the anti-GM lobby groups contained in this category.
The other two prominent Science sub-themes were Containment and Science regulation. Just over half of all source citations pertaining to Containment had a positive value stance with citations from scientists (16.3%) and industry spokespersons (21.7%) being the most prominent, again illustrating the pro-GM bias of these groups. The citations of policy makers (5.4%) and regulatory authorities (5.4%) also illustrated a positive value stance towards Containment. The two source groups with the highest percentage of citations with a negative value stance towards Containment were policy makers (9.8%) and industry spokespersons (8.7%). The source groups with highest levels of citations with a positive value stance towards Science regulation were policy makers (14.8), scientists (5.2%) and industry spokespersons (4.8%). Those source groups with highest levels of citations with a negative value stance on Science regulation were scientists (27.0%), industry spokespersons (5.2%), policy makers (4.8%) and lobby groups (4.4%). Scientists were six times more likely to be against Science regulation than for it. The results for policy makers on this sub-theme again illustrate the political split between the Green Party and other parties. Also the results indicate the split between certain industry spokespersons, for example, the organics industry versus scientific research industries such as the CRIs. The lobby group result shows that on this sub-theme the pro-GM lobby groups’ citations were in the majority. These results will be discussed further in the next chapter.
Again following the order established in Section 4.2.6.2, citations regarding political sub- themes were the next to be analysed. As noted in Figure 4, anti-GM activism had the highest volume of citations in any one stage. Positive and negative citations on Anti-GM activism were nearly equally divided with positive citations equalling 39.4% and negative citations 40.2%. The two source types most likely to have source citations in favour of anti-GM activism were policy makers (14.6%) and lobby groups (14.6%), indicating that these
113
citations were from the Green party and anti-GM lobby groups. The groups with the highest number of citations against Anti-GM activism were scientists (11.6%), policy makers (12.4%), lobby groups (6.6%) and industry spokespersons (6.6%).
While the sub-theme of Political procedure had the highest number of citations in four stages, no value stance result is available for the sub-theme due to the manner in which it is coded. For a source citation to be coded under the sub-theme Political procedure it was necessary that the citation merely discussed political procedures, for example, the procedures of the Royal Commission of Inquiry, without judging whether these procedures were either positive or negative. Therefore, by definition, citations coded under this sub-theme could have no value stance (see Appendix 4).
As shown in Figure 4, the sub-theme of Political division had the highest volume of citations in one stage. A positive citation for Political division supports the idea that political division does exist over the GM issue. A negative citation for Political division supports the idea that no political division exists over the GM issue. When analysed accordingly, the majority of citations were negative towards Political division, indicating that the majority of those sources quoted (48.3%) believed that no political division existed with regard to GM. Policy makers were the largest group to have citations regarding this sub-theme, with (44.7%) having negative citations. This means that the majority of policy makers supported the view that political division did not exist on the GM issue. This result appears to belie the obvious differences over GM between the Green Party and other parties in parliament. This seeming disparity will be discussed in the following chapter.
Following the order of analysis established in Section 4.2.6 above, the final political sub- theme analysed here is the Report of the Royal Commission. The majority of citations, just over 45%, were in favour of the report. The two largest source types to have citations favouring the report were policy makers (15.5%) and scientists (12.5%). Policy makers were also the largest source type to have citations against the report (9.3%). The apparent split between policy makers again points to the differences between the Green Party and other parties in Parliament with regard to the place of GM in New Zealand society, and these differences and their possible impacts on the resulting reportage will be discussed in more detail in the next chapter.
Following the order established in section 4.2.6.3 the next group of sub-themes to be analysed in this manner were the Economic sub-themes, and GM economics as illustrated in
114
Figure 5 had the highest volume of source citations of all economic sub-themes in four of the seven stages. The majority of source citations on this sub-theme were positive (58.5%) indicating that sources believed GM would enhance the New Zealand economy. The source types most likely to have positive citations on GM economics were industry spokespersons (30.1%), scientists (12.1%), policy makers (9.7%) and lobby groups (3.1%). Sources expressing citations with a negative value stance on GM economics (21.2%), believed that the adoption of GM would have a negative effect on New Zealand’s economy. The three source types most likely to express a negative value stance on this sub-theme were industry spokespersons (8.0%), policy makers (5.9%) and scientists (3.5%). This apparent contradiction illustrates that within the source types there existed opposing divisions and this will be explored in the next chapter.
As illustrated in Figure 5, the sub-theme of Consumer choice had the highest volume of source citations for all economic sub-themes in two stages and indeed had the highest volume of citations of any economic sub-theme in Stage I. Over half (56%) of all citations on this sub-theme were in favour of more consumer choice with regard to GM foods. This result illustrates the strong preference for consumers to be able to choose between GM and non-GM food. The source types with citations most in favour of Consumer choice were industry spokespersons (20.2%), policy makers (19.1%) and lobby groups (5.4%). Just over 6% of citations were against Consumerchoice and the majority of these were from policy makers. The differences between those policy makers for Consumer choice and those against it will be discussed in the next chapter. The remaining citations had no bias towards Consumer choice.
As illustrated in Figure 5 the only other economic sub-theme to gain more than 5% of the volume of all citations was Organics. The majority of (91.6%) citations on this issue had a positive value stance. The source type with citations most in favour of Organics were industry spokespersons (62.5%). It must be noted that the majority of such citations came from those representing the organics industry.
The other three themes of Morality, Health and Environment as already noted in Figure 2 rarely gained more than 10% of the volume of source citations in any one stage of the debate and, therefore, they were not analysed at the level of their respective sub-themes. While these themes were only a small percentage of the overall coverage, it is interesting to note the
115
value stances of the citations on these themes and so an analysis of this was conducted. The full results of this appear in Appendix 4.
In terms of the Morality sub-themes it was found that the majority of citations (77.0%) discussing Ethical consideration were in favour of such considerations being taken when making decisions about the application of GM technologies. The source types most likely to have positive citations on this sub-theme were scientists (23.0%) and industry spokespersons (14.8%), Religious spokespersons (12.2%) and Māori spokespersons (12.2%). There existed only one source citation that was negative towards Ethical consideration.
When examining whether or not sources believed that GM transgressed moral values, the majority of source citations (65.1%) were positive, arguing that these sources believed that GM did indeed transgress moral values. The source types most likely to have a positive citation with regard to Ethical transgression were Māori spokespersons (16.3%), policy makers (11.6%), environmental and animal welfare groups (11.6%) and religious spokespersons (9.3%). Just over a quarter (25.7%) of source citations regarding Ethical transgression had a negative value stance indicating that those sources did not believe that GM transgressed moral values. No one source type was more likely to have this value stance than another.
Finally the majority of source citations (82.0%) discussing the issue of Ethical regulation had a positive value stance. Source citations with a neutral or negative value stance on Ethical regulation were equally divided at 9.0% each. Therefore, overall, sources speaking about the ethics of GM felt that more consideration was needed in terms of the ethical implications of GM, with some believing that it transgressed moral and ethical values, while others argued that there was a need for ethical regulations with regard to the application of GM technology. The last two major themes of Environment and Health illustrated that over half (53.3%) of source citations on Environmental effects were negative; arguing that many believed that GM would have an adverse effect on the environment. Just under a third (29%) of source citations had a positive value stance with regard to Environmental effects arguing these sources believed that GM would have a positive effect on the environment. The other 20% of source citations had a neutral value stance. In contrast 61.5% of source citations had a positive value stance on the sub-theme Health effects indicating that many sources believed that GM would have positive effects on people’s health. These two results are very similar to results found in European studies and this will be discussed in the next chapter.
116