Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Received: from rly-zd01.mx.aol.com (rly-zd01.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.225]) by
air-zd01.mail.aol.com (v51.26) with SMTP; Wed, 18 Nov 1998 11:06:06
Received: from mailout1.mailbase.ac.uk (mailout1.mailbase.ac.uk
by rly-zd01.mx.aol.com (8.8.8/8.8.5/AOL-4.0.0)
with ESMTP id LAA17513;
Wed, 18 Nov 1998 11:05:37 -0500 (EST)
Received: from naga.mailbase.ac.uk (naga.mailbase.ac.uk [18.104.22.168])
by mailout1.mailbase.ac.uk (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA14845;
Wed, 18 Nov 1998 16:02:42 GMT
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
by naga.mailbase.ac.uk (8.8.x/Mailbase) id QAA17267;
Wed, 18 Nov 1998 16:01:38 GMT
Received: from ultra1.aber.ac.uk (ultra1.aber.ac.uk [22.214.171.124])
by naga.mailbase.ac.uk (8.8.x/Mailbase) with ESMTP id QAA17261;
Wed, 18 Nov 1998 16:01:35 GMT
Received: from pciifa.wir.aber.ac.uk ([126.96.36.199] helo=nhl)
by ultra1.aber.ac.uk with smtp (Exim 2.01 #4)
id 0zgA2x-0000ow-00; Wed, 18 Nov 1998 16:01:35 +0000
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 16:02:00 -0000
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4
Subject: Fw: Leaked Monsanto memos reveal 'collapse of public support'.
From: "Nic Lampkin" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: "ecolagric" <email@example.com>
X-Unsub: To leave, send text 'leave ecol-agric' to firstname.lastname@example.org
Reply-To: "Nic Lampkin" <email@example.com>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>>From: GE-Free-Leeks <GE-Free-Leeks@uk.greenpeace.org>
>>Subject: Leaked Monsanto memos reveal 'collapse of public support'.
>>Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 09:20:54 -0000
>> See the full text of leaked Monsanto documents at
>> You may be aware that agrochemical company Monsanto this summer
>>ran full page advertising in all major UK broadsheet newspapers.
>>According to Monsanto this was at a cost of one million UK pounds.The
>>aim of the advertising was to increase public acceptance of GE
>>(genetically engineered) food among the "upper socio-economic segment"
>>of British society. They failed.
>> Greenpeace has been passed internal documents which we feel
>>others may be interested to read. It details the 'collapse of public
>>support in Britain' for GE food over that time and shows that despite
>>these foods being considered 'unacceptable' by most of the public
>>Monsanto intend to continue forcing them on the consumer.
>> Here are some of the things Monsanto did not put in their ads.
>>All the quotes below come from two leaked internal Monsanto memos: 'The
>>British Test' and 'The Maturing Crisis' (in Germany). The memos were
>>written by Stan Greenberg, Chairman and Chief Executive of Greenberg
>>Research, who has served as polling advisor to President Clinton, Prime
>>Minister Tony Blair and Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder.
>> "Biotechnology and Monsanto face their toughest
>>European test in Britain. The broad climate is extremely inhospitable
>>to biotechnology acceptance and, absent political support in government,
>>Monsanto would surely face unfavorable decisions on its key products.
>>Over the past year, the situation has deteriorated steadily and perhaps
>>at an accelerating pace.
>> The latest survey shows an on-going collapse of
>>public support for biotechnology and GM foods. At each point in this
>>project, we keep thinking that we have reached the low point and that
>>public thinking will stabilize, but we apparently have not reached that
>>point. The latest survey shows a steady decline over the year, which
>>may have accelerated in the most recent period.
>> Overall feeling toward foods with
>>genetically-modified ingredients have grown dramatically more negative,
>>which is probably the best measure of our declining fortunes in Britain.
>> Whether such ingredients are "acceptable" -
>>which encompasses a willingness for such products to exist commercially
>>in Britain - has declined somewhat (from 33 to 25 percent over the
>>year); the number saying that these products are "unacceptable" has
>>skyrocketed: 35 percent last year, rising to 44 percent before the
>>summer and to 51 percent now.
>> In the most recent research confidence in all
>>regulatory agencies has slipped...In our earlier focus groups, stating
>>that seed had been approved by British food safety agencies reduced
>>support for our products.
>> The retailers are critical arbiters in this
>>process, since they have very high credibility in Britain, according to
>>our surveys, and because they believe Monsanto has handed off to them
>>the task of winning public acceptance. They carry with them their
>>resentment of Monsanto for badly mismanaging the introduction of
>>biotechnology in Europe and for allowing the issue to be decided in the
>>supermarkets. As a result, they are right on the edge - testing public
>>acceptance, but now very open to a moratorium that would get them off
>>the front lines. They are anxious for someone else to move on the front
>>lines, preferably the government.
>> These observations about the retailers are based
>>on interviews conducted between September 25th and 29th with the heads
>>of corporate communication, heads of corporate affairs, chief scientific
>>advisors and senior buyers and managers at Marks & Spencer, Waitrose,
>>Tesco, CWS, Asda and Safeway.
>> Retailers are divided about how this will work
>>out over the long term. One was fairly confident that, barring "a major
>>catastrophe," it will continue and it will be accepted as a regular
>>process"; others thought there was a "fifty-fifty" chance of "losing to
>>the pressure groups"; it could "turn out like irradiation. Which is,
>>you don't do it."
>> The networks that most directly influence the
>>decision-makers in Britain - the upper socio-economic AB segment - are
>>hardly leading the way for biotechnology acceptance. They are at least
>>as negative on the subject as the general public.
>> Overall feeling toward Greenpeace has dropped
>>from 64 to 58 degrees this summer; UK environment groups dropped from 60
>>to 56 degrees. At the same time, feelings toward the Consumer
>>Association have remained unchanged, suggesting this is a specific
>>response to the environmental groups.
>> The hostility to GM food and agricultural
>>products combines with a high regard for environmental groups in
>>Germany. The Bund receives a very high thermometer scores of 72
>>degrees, but Greenpeace is not far behind (69 degrees, which translates
>>into 66 percent warm and 16 percent cool).
>> The Monsanto advertising campaign....directed at
>>ABs and using "non-news" publications - was, for the most part,
>>overwhelmed by the society-wide collapse of support for genetic
>>engineering in foods.
>> There is considerable evidence from the elite
>>and public interviews that the anti-biotechnology discourse focuses on
>>American companies in general and Monsanto in particular. The company
>>is seen to dominate this field, employ aggressive practices and to enter
>>the market with a certain disregard for the German consumer.
>> That sentiment, expressed by the elites, is
>>strongly reflected in the general public. In the focus groups,
>>biotechnology companies were seen to be willing to risk great human
>>danger in order to make profits. That is balanced by a somewhat weaker
>>view that bio-technology companies are future-oriented and modern.
>> For the opposition elites[in Germany], Monsanto
>>has emerged as singularly unscrupulous - a real symbol of corporate
>>greed and power. The elite anti-biotech respondents described Monsanto
>>in very harsh terms, indeed harsher than anything we have seen in
>> The environmentalists remain skeptical that
>>genetic engineering could ever produce a Greenpeace protest as
>>successful as Brent Spar, which "was a small miracle". GM seeds offer
>>nothing as dramatic as drilling platforms.
>> Right now the focus [in Germany] is on nuclear
>>power, but it is not out of the question that some crisis in the food
>>chain could shift the focus to genetic engineering. In that
>>eventuality, the outside groups are clear, according the EMNID, Monsanto
>>"comes closest to exemplifying the image of the enemy - Shell."
>> In their own advertisements, Monsanto suggested that readers who
>>were interested should contact some opponents of GE food, including
>>Friends of the Earth, Iceland Frozen Foods and Greenpeace. If you want
>>more info on these memos, we suggest you ring Monsanto on +44 171 495
>>8455 and ask them for copies (or visit the GP website at
>>http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/monsanto where the documents are available
>>in full ).
>> For more information on Stan Greenberg you may wish to phone his
>>office on +1 202 5475200 or visit
To Unsubscribe: Email firstname.lastname@example.org with "unsubscribe sanet-mg".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email email@example.com with the command