1.Monsanto's unethical and irresponsible advertising
2.Every trick in the book
3.Trade wars and media campaigns

GM WATCH COMMENT: Yesterday we brought you our choice of the best article of 2006 - Palagummi Sainath's powerful expose of the tragic consequences for farmers in Maharashtra of the gap between illusion and reality when it comes to Bt cotton.
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=7430

Today we turn to our choice of the best report of 2006, which is:
Who benefits from GM crops?
Monsanto and the corporate-driven genetically modified crop revolution http://www.foei.org/publications/pdfs/gmcrops2006full.pdf

This report from Friends of the Earth International looks at the first 10 years of GM crops and systematically takes apart the hype and spin used by Monsanto and its supporters, showing how:

"The hype about the advantages that GM crops provide to the environment, consumers, and farmers is... predominantly the result of propaganda by the biotech industry and industry sponsored organizations including the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA). ISAAA's annual reports, published at the beginning of every year since the late 1990s, have misrepresented the performance of GM crops. They have lauded the benefits that have accompanied the introduction of GM crops everywhere, and have ignored the negative impacts and other problems. In fact, as this report shows, the reality of GM crops has been strikingly different from Monsanto and ISAAA's claims."

Amongst much else, this report helps to explain the tragedy unfolding in places like Maharashtra:

"Ultimately, the story of the introduction of Bt cotton in India shows that when a big corporation decides to push a product, it will take extraordinary measures to conquer markets. The marketing blitz of seed companies like Mahyco-Monsanto has succeeded in convincing many farmers to switch over to Bt cotton, and such false promises and aggressive claims continue to this day."

As part of its exposure of the biotech industry's use of hype, "Who benefits from GM crops?" draws on two important earlier reports, and we have telling extracts from all three.

One of these reports is Aaron de Grassi's seminal 2003 analysis of the use of GM hype in Africa and beyond - "Genetically Modified Crops and Sustainable Poverty Alleviation in Sub-Saharan Africa; an assessment of current evidence".
http://allafrica.com/sustainable/resources/00010161.html

The other appeared just a few months before "Who benefits from GM crops?" It was a report based on research into how BT cotton was being marketed throughout India. These investigations were coordinated by the Centre for Sustainable Agriculture and Greenpeace India. "The Marketing of Bt Cotton in India" showed in startling detail how Monsanto's Indian subsidiary, Monsanto-Mahyco, and its sub-licensee Bt Cotton seed companies, had been pulling every dirty trick in the PR book in order to lure India's struggling farmers into using GM cotton.

We start with an extract from "Who benefits from GM crops?" The 75-page report looks at the gap between hype and reality right around the globe. The short extract we've chosen looks at Monsanto's unethical and irresponsible advertising campaigns and in particular its use of farmers as "the new biotech pawns". This leads on to extracts from the two earlier reports that add remarkable detail on the biotech industry's PR exploitation of farmers.
---

1.Monsanto's unethical and irresponsible advertising taken from Who benefits from GM crops?

Monsanto and the corporate-driven genetically modified crop revolution http://www.foei.org/publications/pdfs/gmcrops2006full.pdf

Monsanto has used unethical and irresponsible media and advertisement campaigns to gain the confidence of farmers.

The National Commission of Indian Farmers has reprimanded biotech companies for their "aggressive advertisement". Intensive marketing through local newspapers, local meetings and television advertisements, using popular actors in some cases, has been undertaken in several Indian states. In Brazil, Monsanto launched an educational program in schools in April 2005, which was eventually halted by the Minister of Culture following public opposition.

Monsanto and pro-biotech organizations are renowned for using so-called 'small farmers' to attest to the success of GM crops. One of the best known is Buthelezi, who is promoted around the world as a poor farmer but in reality appears to be a [relatively] wealthy South African farmer from the Makhatini Flats. Buthelezi even made an appearance at the launch of the US complaint against the EU at the World Trade Organization in 2003.

ISAAA has used similar 'grassroots' strategies: they supported the work of the so-called Asian Regional Farmers' Network (ASFARNET), which claimed to be a network of farmers from India, the Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia and Vietnam. A background check on these 'farmers' cast some doubt on their professions: Dr. Banpot, the 'farmer' from Thailand, is a high-profile pro-GMO scientist from a public research institution in Thailand, and the 'farmer' from the Philippines, Edwin Paraluman, heads a local irrigators' association in General Santos City but does not appear to belong to any farmers' organization.394
---

2.EVERY TRICK IN THE BOOK

information taken and summarised by GM Watch from THE MARKETING OF BT COTTON IN INDIA
http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=5741

In Madhya Pradesh…

FAKE FARMERS

Posters appeared in many places in Madhya Pradesh before sowing time, featuring a person who claimed to have gained great benefits from using Bt Cotton seed. These advertisements urged other farmers to benefit similarly from the use of Bt Cotton.

Investigations revealed that this "farmer" was actually a paan dabbahwala (the owner of a little shop selling betel leaves and cigarettes) who is