Monday, July 29, 2013

iBreakfast on Monsanto, GMO's, NY Times and Oranges

GMO's - All bad unless...the New York Times reports otherwise 

A few months ago we did a visualization and case study of Monsanto's litigious approach to "viral marketing" where they used the natural spread of their seeds as a reason to sue "infringers" (neighboring farmers) with patent violations.   (See Monsanto story here)

After 10 or so years of this, enough farmers and other biotech competitors that had been steamrolled this massive Mid-Western company, that they joined forces with environmentalist who dubbed genetically modified organisms (GMO's) Frankenfood. That, in turn, has created a growing PR nightmare for Monsanto and GMO's  (sounds like monster, right) - for which they are the symbolic epicenter. GMOs now face bans in Europe and labeling issues in the US.

Florida Shoots First
Most of all, Monsanto and GMO's face a sense of public repugnance even though farmers tend to believe that nature has always genetically modified foods. Such is the payback of bad publicity.

Now, however, Florida is facing a major blight that has felled as much 25% of their orange trees. They believe that some type of genetic engineering is necessary to save their industry. Their application to the FDA already exposed them to a storm of public criticism thanks to the bad publicity. If they find a genetic solution, will it still be "all natural"? Will OJ be Frankenjuice? Will Monsanto and GMO's continue to be vilified. Can any of these reputations be restored?

Read the NY Times Can GMO Tech Save the Orange? and compare.
Post a Comment