Siloed discourses: a year-long study of twitter engagement on the use of CRISPR in food and agriculture

References

• Agre, P., et al. 2016. “Laureates Letter Supporting Precision Agriculture (GMOs).” Support Precision Agriculture, June 29. Accessed 31 January 2023. https://www.supportprecisionagriculture.org/nobel-laureate-gmo-letter_rjr.html.
   Google Scholar
• Ahmad, S., L. Tang, R. Shahzad, A. Mawia, G. Rao, S. Jamil, and C. Wei. 2021. “CRISPR-Based Crop Improvements: A Way Forward to Achieve Zero Hunger.” Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 69 (30): 8307–8323. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.1c02653.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, J. T., E. Howell, M. A. Xenos, D. Scheufele, and D. Brossard. 2021. ““Learning without Seeking?” Incidental Exposure to Science News on Social Media & Knowledge of Gene Editing.” Journal of Science Communication 20 (4): A01. https://doi.org/10.22323/2.20040201.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bauer, M. W. 2002. “Controversial Medical and Agri-Food Biotechnology: A Cultivation Analysis.” Public Understanding of Science 11 (2): 93–111. https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/11/2/301.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berkhout, F. 2002. “Novel Foods, Traditional Debates: Framing Biotechnology Sustainability.” New Genetics and Society 21 (2): 131–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/1463677022000006989.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Britt, B. C., J. L. Hayes, A. Musaev, P. Sheinidashtegol, S. Parrott, and D. L. Albright. 2021. “Using Targeted Betweenness Centrality to Identify Bridges to Neglected Users in the Twitter Conversation on Veteran Suicide.” Social Network Analysis and Mining 11 (40): 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13278-021-00747-x.
   Google Scholar
• Bud, R. 1993. The Uses of Life. A History of Biotechnology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Calabrese, C., J. Ding, B. Millam, and G. A. Barnett. 2020. “The Uproar Over Gene-Edited Babies: A Semantic Network Analysis of CRISPR on Twitter.” Environmental Communication 14 (7): 954–970. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2019.1699135.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caplan, A. L., B. Parent, M. Shen, and C. Plunkett. 2015. “No Time to Waste—The Ethical Challenges Created by CRISPR: CRISPR/Cas, Being an Efficient, Simple, and Cheap Technology to Edit the Genome of Any Organism, Raises Many Ethical and Regulatory Issues beyond the Use to Manipulate Human Germ Line Cells.” EMBO Reports 16 (11): 1421–1426. https://doi.org/10.15252/embr.201541337.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cook, G., P. T. Robbins, and E. Pieri. 2006. ““Words of Mass Destruction”: British Newspaper Coverage of the Genetically Modified Food Debate, Expert and Non-Expert Reactions.” Public Understanding of Science 15 (1): 5–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662506058756.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dawson, W., A. Paintsil, J. Bingaman, and P. R. Brewer. 2022. “CRISPR Images: Media Use and Public Opinion About Gene Editing.” Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society 42 (1-2): 11–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/02704676221080919.
   Google Scholar
• Dickenson, D., and M. Darnovsky. 2019. “Did a Permissive Scientific Culture Encourage the ‘CRISPR babies’ Experiment?” Nature Biotechnology 37 (4): 355–357. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-019-0077-3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischer, K., and S. Hess. 2022. “The Swedish Media Debate on GMO Between 1994 and 2018: What Attention was Given to Farmers’ Perspectives?” Environmental Communication 16 (1): 43–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2021.1960406.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischer, K., P. Wennström, and M. Ågren. 2019. “The Swedish Media Debate on GMO 1994-2017.” Future Food Reports 10. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences.
   Google Scholar
• Freeman, L. C. 1977. “A Set of Measures of Centrality Based on Betweenness.” Sociometry 40 (1): 35–41. https://doi.org/10.2307/3033543.
   Google Scholar
• Frewer, L. J., S. Miles, and R. Marsh. 2002. “The Media and Genetically Modified Foods: Evidence in Support of Social Amplification of Risk.” Risk Analysis: An International Journal 22 (4): 701–711. https://doi.org/10.1111/0272-4332.00062.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaillochet, C., W. Develtere, and T. B. Jacobs. 2021. “CRISPR Screens in Plants: Approaches, Guidelines, and Future Prospects.” The Plant Cell 33 (4): 794–813. https://doi.org/10.1093/plcell/koab099.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gates, B. 2018. “Gene Editing for Good: How CRISPR Could Transform Global Development.” Foreign Affairs 97 (3): 166. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2018-04-10/gene-editing-good.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glenna, L., and A. Bruce. 2021. “Suborning Science for Profit: Monsanto, Glyphosate, and Private Science Research Misconduct.” Research Policy 50 (7): 104290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2021.104290.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glover, D. 2010. “The Corporate Shaping of GM Crops as a Technology for the Poor.” The Journal of Peasant Studies 37 (1): 67–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150903498754.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greenpeace. 2021. “Danger Ahead: Why Gene Editing is not the Answer to the EU's Environmental Challenges.” Greenpeace. Accessed 23 January 2023. https://www.greenpeace.org/static/planet4-eu-unit-stateless/2021/04/20210331-Greenpeace-gene-editing-position-paper-EN.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• The Greens/EFA. 2021. Scientific Critique of Leopoldina and EASAC Statements on Genome Edited Plants in the EU: Executive Summary of a Study by Ensser and CSS.
   Google Scholar
• Gyngell, C. 2017. “Gene Editing and the Health of Future Generations.” Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 110 (7): 276–279. https://doi.org/10.1177/0141076817705616.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hajer, M. A. 1995. The Politics of Environmental Discourse: Ecological Modernization and the Policy Process. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/019829333X.001.0001.
   Google Scholar
• Hansen, D. L., B. Shneiderman, and M. Smith. 2019. Analyzing Social Media Networks with NodeXL: Insights from a Connected World. 2nd ed. Burlington, MA: Morgan Kaufmann.
   Google Scholar
• Helliwell, R., S. Hartley, W. Pearce, and L. O'Neill. 2017. “Why are NGOs Sceptical of Genome Editing? NGOs' Opposition to Agricultural Biotechnologies is Rooted in Scepticism about the Framing of Problems and Solutions, rather than Just Emotion and Dogma.” EMBO Reports 18 (12): 2090–2093. https://doi.org/10.15252/embr.201744385.
   Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, S., J. B. Hurlbut, and K. Saha. 2015. “CRISPR Democracy: Gene Editing and the Need for Inclusive Deliberation.” Issues in Science and Technology 32 (1): 25–32. https://issues.org/crispr-democracy-gene-editing-inclusive-deliberation/.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ji, J., M. Robbins, J. D. Featherstone, C. Calabrese, and G. A. Barnett. 2022. “Comparison of Public Discussions of Gene Editing on Social Media Between the United States and China.” PLoS One 17 (5): e0267406. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0267406.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jinek, M., K. Chylinski, I. Fonfara, M. Hauer, J. A. Doudna, and E. Charpentier. 2012. “A Programmable Dual-RNA–Guided DNA Endonuclease in Adaptive Bacterial Immunity.” Science 337 (6096): 816–821. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1225829.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaiser, J. 2021. “CRISPR Injected Into the Blood Treats a Genetic Disease for First Time.” Science, June 26. https://www.science.org/content/article/crispr-injected-blood-treats-genetic-disease-first-time.
   Google Scholar
• Le Page, M. 2021. “Tomato Is First CRISPR-Edited Food to Go on Sale in the World.” New Scientist, September 24, 2021. https://www.newscientist.com/article/2291194-tomato-is-first-crispr-edited-food-to-go-on-sale-in-the-world/.
   Google Scholar
• Ledford, H. 2015. “CRISPR, the Disruptor.” Nature 522 (7554): 20–24. https://doi.org/10.1038/522020a.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levidow, L. 1999. “Britain's Biotechnology Controversy: Elusive Science, Contested Expertise.” New Genetics and Society 18 (1): 47–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/14636779908656889.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lipton, E. 2015. “Food Industry Enlisted Academics in G.M.O. Lobbying War, Emails Show.” The New York Times, September 5.
   Google Scholar
• Macnaghten, P., and M. G. J. L. Habets. 2020. “Breaking the Impasse: Towards a Forward-Looking Governance Framework for Gene Editing with Plants.” Plants, People, Planet 2: 353–365. https://doi.org/10.1002/ppp3.10107.
   Google Scholar
• Mahé, A.-L. 2019. “Aligning Epistemology and Writing: A Literary Analysis of Qualitative Research.” International Studies Perspectives 20 (3): 226–245. https://doi.org/10.1093/isp/ekz004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marchetti, R., and D. Ceccobelli. 2016. “Twitter and Television in a Hybrid Media System: The 2013 Italian Election Campaign.” Journalism Practice 10 (5): 626–644. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2015.1040051.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Massel, K., Y. Lam, A. C. S. Wong, L. T. Hickey, A. K. Borrell, and I. D. Godwin. 2021. “Hotter, Drier, CRISPR: The Latest Edit on Climate Change.” Theoretical and Applied Genetics 134 (6): 1691–1709. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00122-020-03764-0.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Müller, M., M. Schneider, M. Salathé, and E. Vayena. 2020. “Assessing Public Opinion on CRISPR-Cas9: Combining Crowdsourcing and Deep Learning.” Journal of Medical Internet Research 22 (8): e17830. https://doi.org/10.2196/17830.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newman, M. E. J., and M. Girvan. 2004. “Finding and Evaluating Community Structure in Networks.” Physical Review 69 (2): 026113. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.69.026113.
   Google Scholar
• Ni, C., Z. Wan, C. Yan, Y. Liu, E. W. Clayton, B. Malin, and Z. Yin. 2022. “The Public Perception of the# GeneEditedBabies Event across Multiple Social Media Platforms: Observational Study.” Journal of Medical Internet Research 24 (3): e31687. https://doi.org/10.2196/31687.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noltemeyer, M. 2021. “Plant Genetics Patents Shared with Research Partners.” World Grain, September 8, 2021. https://www.world-grain.com/articles/15804-plant-genetics-patents-shared-with-research-partners.
   Google Scholar
• Ribero, S. 2020. “Nobel Prize for a Gene Bomb.” The Ecologist, October 22. https://theecologist.org/2020/oct/22/nobel-prize-gene-bomb.
   Google Scholar
• Riddell, J., A. Brown, I. Kovic, and J. Jauregui. 2017. “Who Are the Most Influential Emergency Physicians on Twitter?” Western Journal of Emergency Medicine 18 (2): 281–287. https://doi.org/10.5811/westjem.2016.11.31299.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rock, J. S., M. A. Schnurr, A. Kingiri, D. Glover, G. D. Stone, A. Ely, and K. Fischer. 2023. “Beyond the Genome: Genetically Modified Crops in Africa and the Implications for Genome Editing.” Development and Change 54 (1): 117–142. https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12750.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rundblad, G. 2007. “Impersonal, general, and social: The use of metonymy versus passive voice in medical discourse.” Written Communication 24 (3): 250–277. https://doi.org/10.1177/07410883073029.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scott, J. 2012. Social Network Analysis. 3rd ed. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Smedley, M. A., S. Hayta, M. Clarke, and W. A. Harwood. 2021. “CRISPR-Cas9 Based Genome Editing in Wheat.” Current Protocols 1 (3): e65. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpz1.65.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Stapleton, P., and A. Torres Yabar. 2022. “Playing God? Media Coverage of CRISPR in the United States.” Public Understanding of Science, https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625221138953.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stephan, H. R. 2012. “Revisiting the Transatlantic Divergence Over GMOs: Toward a Cultural-Political Analysis.” Global Environmental Politics 12 (4): 104–124. https://doi.org/10.1162/GLEP_a_00142.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tabei, Y., S. Shimura, Y. Kwon, S. Itaka, and N. Fukino. 2020. “Analyzing Twitter Conversation on Genome-Edited Foods and Their Labeling in Japan.” Frontiers in Plant Science 11: 1–10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2020.535764.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tosun, J., and S. Schaub. 2017. “Mobilization in the European Public Sphere: The Struggle Over Genetically Modified Organisms.” Review of Policy Research 34 (3): 310–330. https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12235.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ursache, R., S. Fujita, V. Dénervaud Tendon, and N. Geldner. 2021. “Combined Fluorescent Seed Selection and Multiplex CRISPR/Cas9 Assembly for Fast Generation of Multiple Arabidopsis Mutants.” Plant Methods 17 (1): 111. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13007-021-00811-9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vosoughi, S., D. Roy, and S. Aral. 2018. “The Spread of True and False News Online.” Science 359 (6380): 1146–1151. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aap9559.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wakita, K., and T. Tsurumi. 2007. “Finding Community Structure in Mega-Scale Social Networks.” In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW ‘07), Banff, AB, Canada, May 8–12. New York, NY: Association for Computing Machinery.
   Google Scholar
• Walker, B., and J. Malson. 2020. “Science, God, and Nature: A Textual and Frequency Analysis of Facebook Comments on News Articles About Agricultural and Environmental Gene Editing.” Environmental Communication 14 (7): 1004–1016. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2020.1761853.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waltz, E. 2022. “GABA-Enriched Tomato Is First CRISPR-Edited Food to Enter Market.” Nature Biotechnology 40 (1): 9–11. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41587-021-00026-2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, W., and L. Guo. 2018. “Framing Genetically Modified Mosquitoes in the Online News and Twitter: Intermedia Frame Setting in the Issue-Attention Cycle.” Public Understanding of Science 27 (8): 937–951. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662518799564.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wasserman, S., and K. Faust. 1994. Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Structural Analysis in the Social Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815478.
   Google Scholar
• Zhang, X., A. Chen, and W. Zhang. 2021. “Before and After the Chinese Gene-Edited Human Babies: Multiple Discourses of Gene Editing on Social Media.” Public Understanding of Science 30 (5): 570–587. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662520987754.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar