Scientists who mostly see merit in GM foods have failed to get their message across in the media, in contrast to the considerable success of organisations opposed to biotechnology such as Genetic Concern, according to an Irish academic.
At a debate last night on how the media handled the GM food controversy, Prof Peter Whitaker of NUI Maynooth said scientists had failed to bridge the gulf between them and the public, which led to misunderstanding and suspicion. If the chances of error were small, academics felt they had to cover their backs.
In contrast, non-governmental organisations could be controversial, provocative and direct - which newspapers liked - while academics were balanced, difficult to understand and rather reticent; a recipe which did not hit the headlines.
"NGOs [against GM foods] have less problems with absolutes. In my view, they can label something not 100 per cent white as black," he said at the event last night, organised by the Irish Science and Technology Journalists Association and the Guild of Agricultural Journalists to mark Science Week, which begins at the weekend.
The chief executive of the Food Safety Authority of Ireland, Dr Patrick Wall, said media coverage had been a lot more balanced in the Republic than in Britain. There was, nonetheless, misinformation in circulation.
Coverage generally had shown that consumer confidence in scientists had been damaged, and also revealed how "the power of small concerned groups changed an entire European agenda".
Mr Brian Trench of Dublin City University school of communications said the debate was polarised and highly charged.
The polarisation, he added, was "not a media effect, certainly not exclusively so". It was quite hard to find scare-mongering headlines though the press was the target of different "claims groups" and often accused of being imbalanced.
