Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Communication Inquiry
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
0196859908325144v1
33/1/5    most recent
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Fennell, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Marketing Science

The Corporate Faces of Genetic Engineering

Dana Fennell

University of Southern Mississippi

The controversy over genetically engineered foods can be seen as a struggle over knowledge, whose version of truth will be accepted. Drawing off frameworks from social studies of science, the following is a qualitative content analysis of the corporate ideology of "life science" companies. The texts of five companies, from the time period of 2000 to 2003, are analyzed. Somewhat paradoxically, companies attempt to juggle the multiple tasks of branding/selling a unique product while acting as a teacher to the general public and presenting seemingly unbiased and objective knowledge. Companies rely on many of the discursive tactics previously outlined by researchers, while appearing to modify them somewhat to respond to public controversy. However, although it has been asserted that modern times have created a postmodern society where science loses its grand authority, companies work to reaffirm modern notions of science as progress even though claiming they are engaging in dialogue with the public.

Key Words: biotechnology • genetic engineering • corporation • rhetoric • public relations

This version was published on January 1, 2009

Journal of Communication Inquiry, Vol. 33, No. 1, 5-26 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/0196859908325144
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?