11/17/05 Ag Com, Part two

11/17/05 Ag Com, Part two

Skeptics may wonder why a new coalition of ag entities and supporters called "Ag Com" would have any better success than similar groups in promoting the positive aspects and debunking the negative myths about agriculture. According to "Ag Com" steering committee member Jo Ann Cunningham, it already has both a model from which to work from and a track record of successfully countering false claims and bully tactics from the environmental and anti-farming crowd. The model is based on the work of Cunningham's organization, the "Food Forethought" foundation, which monitors media reports on ag both good and bad, and when needs be, takes a proactive and timely stand to negative reports on agriculture. And while the partnership known as "Ag Com" has been in formation since this summer, this coalition received its first test under fire two months ago. Several environmental groups attempted to prevent the new PBS series, "America's Heartland" from airing in several markets through petition. Their main complaint was the program was sponsored by Monsanto, and therefore would represent only large production ag. Now considering the petition was circulated a month before the program aired its first episode, and was not seen by the petitioning groups, that had pro-ag groups like "Ag Com" upset. But Cunningham said Ag Com's partners immediately responded to the petition and much in the same proactive manner environmental groups drum up media response to their cause. There was a "Food Forethought" column to point out that PBS is public airwaves and therefore should not cater to environmentalist demands to censor one type or programming or another. There was a letter and e-mail writing campaign to both PBS's national headquarters and affiliate stations carrying "America's Heartland" saying the same things, with some individuals in those correspondences threatening to no longer financially sponsor PBS programming. The proactive stand worked. CUNNINGHAM: We got great response. Within two weeks of putting out that column, we were contacted by the powerful environmentalist group that put out this petition to begin with, and they said, we would kindly like you to take names off this list. Oh really? Yes, they've heard that you're putting out their name and they don't want to be seen as this. Interesting. So we made a big difference. We had people withdraw from that list. And that act, along with a similar quick response to what "Ag Com" members deemed an irresponsible anti-fertilizer public service announcement produced by the Ad Council, gained notice among many in the ag industry. And while "Ag Com" is still in a formulative stage, it plans to remain on guard for other issues that may arise.
Previous Report11/16/05 AgCom, Part one
Next Report11/18/05 FSA`s new leader