EXPERT ASSESSMENT - Kenya: Controversy over GMO Maize Import Deepens

http://allafrica.com/stories/201004141073.html



PART 1
Odhianbo, Allan. "Kenya: Controversy over GMO Maize Import Deepens." All Africa Global Media. All Africa Global Media, 15 04 2010. Web. 19 Apr 2010. http://allafrica.co/stories/201004141073.htm

Purpose: Inform the reader about the controversy surrounding the importation of GMO maize.

Key information includes:

1. 40,000 tons of South African Maize lying in the port still
2. Regular priced corn gets more expensive as GMO corn influences the market even more.
   

Key Conclusion: GMO maize can ultimately harm the environment and possibly the economy if parts of Africa decide not to buy GMO corn.

I can better understand this article and the controversy behind it because of this course. I've learned to look deeper into the article and to assume what the author of the article is saying.

• Kenyan Government
• Mombasa
• Kenyan Biodiversity Coalition
• National Biosafety Committee
• National Council for Science and Technology (NCST)

This is a report on a topic with international implications.


PART 2

Article 1
Kenyan GM maize shipment blocked
Kenyan GM maize shipment blocked." Kenya Broadcasting Corporation 9 Apr 2010: 1. Web. 13 May 2010.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8609316.stm

(Informational Article)

• Kenyan Biodiversity Coalition claimed Kenyan authorities had failed to tell the public of its decesion to import GM maize.
• Many African countries are under increasing pressure to grow GM crops to tackle hunger and malnutrtion, and drought in recent years has caused food shortages in Kenya.

Article 2

Butunyi, Cosmas. "Kenya ‘aware that maize was GMO’." Daily Nation. Daily Nation, 19 Apr 2010. Web. 14 May 2010.
http://www.nation.co.ke/News/-/1056/902498/-/w6wou6/-/index.html

(Informational Article)

Over 40,000 tonnes of maize lying in port untouched

Several sources can verify modification

Part 3

1. There is a small amount of bias through selection and omission. The writer included several negative comments from people related to the topic. Spoken by the Kenya Biodiversity Coalition's advocacy coordinator, Anna Maria "...It will contaminate the Kenyan gene pool."
2. There does not seem to be any bias in the placement of information in the article. The information seems organized by importance of information in general, not by favortism of a side of the arguement.
3. There is bias in the headline. The word controversy gives the situation a negative effect in the reader's mind.
4. There is no bias in photos, caption, and camera angles simply because there are no pictures connected to the article.
5. There is not bias in use of names or titles because everyone referred to are addressed by their proper titles.
6. There is bias in statistics. To make it sound more bigger, the author decided to use actual numbers to describe how much maize there is on the port. Instead of saying "a large amount of maize", the author used actual numbers such as "40,000 tonnes of maize"
7. There was not bias in the sources used in the article. The author used information received from both sides of the arguement.
8. Though not too noticeable, the author uses some negative terms, instead of positive terms. Similar to the bias in the headline, subtle words like controversy make the situation seem more negative.