“Activism in paradise”: A critical discourse analysis of a public
Tracking number
relations campaign against genetic engineering.
ICA-15-10063
21
discourse, that genetic modification technologies will bring rapid economic gain and
international status as a high-tech nation. Although environmentalists and ecologists draw on
deeply entrenched values to argue for the longer-term protection of “paradise”, in a
globalized world the pressure to conform to normalized international discourse may be far
greater than at the time of nuclear protests in the 1980’s.
Conclusions and Implications
The GE Free campaign was relatively successful from a public relations perspective. It
increased public awareness and attempted to increase public knowledge about genetic
modification; it gave a public voice to the groups concerned about genetic modification
technologies and encouraged participation in the debate; and it was partially successful in
influencing government policy. The voluntary moratorium on genetic engineering
commercial field trials was officially extended for another two years, until October 2003. The
campaign bought time and ensured that there would be continuing debate about the regulatory
environment for genetic modification.
The campaign, therefore, demonstrates successful issues-management through the
management of identity to create “zones of meaning” for multiple publics in the debate.
The campaign also demonstrates the range of contested issues in relation to genetic
modification: politically, the campaign demonstrates that publics have power as
citizens/consumers. This may arguably be one of the reasons why Prime Minister, Helen
Clark, called for an early election in July 2002, so that additional GE Free campaigning on
the issue could not encourage more votes for the Green party. Economically, the genetic
modification terrain is still contested - which market values will be favored globally? Will
organic/non genetically engineered produce be sought or will the benefits of genetic
Convention