Credit: ASHLYAK AT ML.WIKIPEDIA

corn.JPG

  • ASHLYAK AT ML.WIKIPEDIA

Everyone knows the Mercury‘s not the only local paper to endorse a “no” vote on Measure 92, the GMO-labeling initiative, right? Most of Portland’s editorial boards have said it’s a bad idea (see here, here, and here).

But for whatever reason, this paper seems to have gotten outsize attention for our stance. A flash mob in protest of the editorial was briefly considered earlier this week. Then KBOO called up to discuss the piece with Denis, while barely touching on the other publications.

It’s almost certainly not going to convince you that we’re not rolling in ill-gotten Monsanto dough—if you’re disposed to that sort of conspiracy—but give the interview a listen.

I'm a news reporter for the Mercury. I've spent a lot of the last decade in journalism — covering tragedy and chicanery in the hills of southwest Missouri, politics in Washington, D.C., and other matters...

11 replies on “Talkin’ GMOs with KBOO”

  2. People are focusing on the Merc’s response because we’ve come to expect a different caliber of response to issues from this publication than from WW or from the Oregonian. I didn’t see any discussion of the more subtle pieces of the GMO issue that I don’t see the mainstream media covering–the environmental impacts, gene spread or the economic detriment of Monsanto’s stream of patents and lawsuits against farmers. I certainly am not arguing that eating GMOs are bad for you but that’s not the only piece of the puzzle, is it?

    Y’all can do better 🙂

  3. The Merc is now comparing itself to the Oregonian (really, the Oregonian?!), Trib, and WW, with a “we’re no better/worse/different than those guys” defense?

    Sniff.

  4. GMOs have reduced the use of pesticides. Please look into the realities of farming and question the pro-organic propaganda before decrying “bad agribusiness”.

  5. The initiative has to do with “the right to know” we deserve the right to know what’s in our food – good or bad. The initiative says nothing about GMOs being bad. It’s a right to know campaign. So anyone voting against it is voting against freedom. Keep letting them get away with not telling us what’s in the food – it has to end.

  6. “The initiative has to do with “the right to know”

    But if you wackos keep denying all scientific evidence, what the fuck is the point of informing you?

    “So anyone voting against it is voting against freedom.”

    Oh, I see, you’re Sean Hannity. I’ll show myself out.

  8. All I know is that the scientists and engineers in my family are telling me to vote no because it is bad for science and the anti-vaxxers in my family are telling me to vote yes.

  9. “If GMOs were so great, what do the proprietors of them have to hide?”

    If you weren’t wearing cat ears I would say something about logical fallacies.

  10. “it’s almost certainly not going to convince you that we’re not rolling in ill-gotten Monsanto dough”

    Ah ha! Seems like a pretty clear admission that you don’t think that there is anything ill-gotten about your payoff from Monsanto.

    We’re on to you, Mercury.

  11. I find it hilarious that the pro-92 folks behind those TV commercials are now admitting that the blue corn they show off in the ad is not from GMO’s at all.
    Let’s talk about truth in advertising now…

Comments are closed.