PRIEST, Susanna Hornig

PERSONAL: Female. Education: University of California, Berkeley, B.A. (with great distinction), 1975; University of Nevada, Las Vegas, M.A., 1979; University of Washington, Ph.D., 1989.

ADDRESSES: Offıce—Department of Journalism, 214B Reed McDonald, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-4111; fax: 979-845-5408. E-mail—susanna@tamu.edu; spriest@cox-internet. com.

CAREER: Educator. University of Washington, Seattle, instructor, 1986-89; Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, 1989—, Center for Science and Technology Policy and Ethics, acting director, 1994-95, interim director, 1997-99, associate professor of journalism and graduate adviser for the science and technology journalism program. College of Engineering, University of Wisconsin, Madison, associate scientist, 1997. Ad hoc reviewer for National Science Foundation and Social Science Research Council of Canada proposals, American Association for the Advancement of Science panel proposals, professional association research paper presentations, and academic journals.

MEMBER: American Association for the Advancement of Science (elected fellow, 2000), Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, International Communication Association, Society for Risk Analysis, Society for Social Studies of Science, Phi Beta Kappa.

AWARDS, HONORS: Recipient of grants and awards from the National Science Foundation, Texas A&M University, National Aeronautics and Space Administration/University of Florida, Texas Department of Transportation, and the University of Wisconsin.

WRITINGS:

Doing Media Research: An Introduction, illustrated by Scott McCullar, Sage Publications (Thousand Oaks, CA), 1996.

A Grain of Truth: The Media, the Public, and Biotechnology, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers (Lanham, MD), 2001.

Associate editor, Public Understanding of Science, 1998—; member of advisory board, Science Communication, 1998—.

SIDELIGHTS: Susanna Hornig Priest is a professor of journalism and a science writer whose study A Grain of Truth: The Media, the Public, and Biotechnology examines the field of biotechnology, and particularly agricultural biotechnology. As Jeff Sharlet and Scott Heller noted in the Chronicle of Higher Education, Priest's first publisher, an academic press, dropped the book when its lawyer found areas that could potentially be a problem. Priest makes direct reference to biotech company Monsanto, for example, which in the past has brought lawsuits for statements it considered libelous.

Priest opens by stating that "the lack of opportunity for informed public debate about these revolutionary technologies and their social and economic impact is a serious failure of democracy. It is a failure that makes our claim to being a free society with a free press somewhat hollow." Priest then launches into every corner of the ag/tech controversy, including the use of bovine growth hormone to increase milk production in cows, animal cloning, and "terminator technology" in seeds, which prevents farmers from using saved seed for the next year's crops.

"Priest argues that the American media, in their coverage of biotechnology, are subject to the 'hegemony' of large institutions, principally the biotechnology industry and a biotech-friendly scientific establishment," noted Daniel Charles for Technology and Culture. He continued, "Priest does not try to prove that media coverage creates public opinion; indeed, she shows that the American public has remained wary of some technological developments despite positive or minimal press coverage."

One aspect of genetically modified (GM) food production involves the insertion of genes from the bacterium bacillus thuringiensis (Bt). Bt produces toxins that kill certain insect pests, and when it is inserted into the genes of a plant, the plant itself produces the toxin, eliminating the need for pesticides. Considered relatively safe for application, Bt has been used by organic farmers, but unknown are the consequences of how insertion into the plant will interact with the genome. A worry is that the genetic properties of the bacteria could move back and forth between plants and animals and humans, which might ultimately create resistance to antibiotics. Another concern is that Bt plants could cross-fertilize with close relatives in the wild, creating superweeds that would also be resistant to pesticides, and eventually to Bt itself, a great risk for organic producers.

James Meek reviewed the book in London Review of Books, noting "perhaps the greatest underlying fear of all—that greater scientific control over biology means greater corporate control over biology, and hence greater corporate control over life itself."

Priest notes that in reporting about biotechnology issues, most reporters go to what they consider credible sources, researchers at corporations and universities, people who are usually quoted as "experts," while critics, even when equally qualified, tend to be called "opponents." "Perhaps more disturbing," commented M. E. Swisher for Agricultural Communicators in Education, is that "Priest points out that the media, especially in the United States, tends to be dominated by large corporations. Most magazines, newspapers, TV stations, and even radio stations are part of a larger conglomerate. . . . Commenting specifically on media accounts of biotechnology, she comments, 'By over-representing the large-institution point of view and the ostensibly monolithic character of U.S. public opinion, media accounts probably helped to suppress the visibility of what dissent existed (original emphasis).' Altogether, this produces what the author calls a spiral of silence. Dissent existed, but was ignored or delegitimized."

Priest feels that an open discussion of the issues from the beginning would have better served the industry, the scientific community, and the public and writes that there are issues that have been avoided but must be addressed. These include the social, cultural, and ethical aspects of the technology. Swisher noted that "deeply held, sometimes almost invisible cultural norms are embedded in this discussion—norms involving, for example, Americans' perceptions of the rights of individuals and the sacred nature of life. Priest argues that the scientific community often tries to ignore the cultural and social context within which the public makes decisions about good and bad or acceptable and unacceptable uses of technology, focusing instead on the more narrow question of measurable risk."

One chapter of the book is about labeling. James Shanahan noted in Public Opinion Quarterly that "it becomes clear that Priest is an advocate of labeling genetically modified food on ethical and democratic grounds. She assumes, probably rightly, that biotechnology companies would prefer to avoid labeling because of the potential public perception that labeling would hurt the image of the product. She also introduces a criticism of the notion that labels confer responsibility on the consumer ('producers are more or less off the hook'); the implication is that society, institutions, and corporations should assume more responsibility for the health of the consumer."

Shanahan concluded by calling A Grain of Truth "a must read for those interested in public opinion about science, the public understanding of science, and media communication about science. It articulates a number of important questions that need to be answered, particularly in relation to developing a general theory of how we can expect media to behave across the life course of a scientific issue."

BIOGRAPHICAL AND CRITICAL SOURCES:

PERIODICALS

Chronicle of Higher Education, June 30, 2000, Jeff Sharlet and Scott Heller, "Hot Type," p. A22.

London Review of Books, July 11, 2002, James Meek, review of A Grain of Truth: The Media, the Public, and Biotechnology, pp. 8-9.

Public Opinion Quarterly, spring, 2002, James Shanahan, review of A Grain of Truth, p. 137.

Technology and Culture, January, 2002, Daniel Charles, review of A Grain of Truth, p. 215.

ONLINE

Agricultural Communicators in Education,http://www.aceweb.org/ (January 4, 2003), M. E. Swisher, review of A Grain of Truth.*