Prop-aganda problems

Steven Jung

I don’t know about all of the other students but I am tired of the propaganda in the proposition commercials.

What I hate most of all are the ways the props are presented when some of the supporters make it look like they are the victim when they are not. Recently “No on Prop 37” supporters have launched a very exaggerated commercial.

They have the director from the FDA telling people to say “no” on the prop. When I did an interview with a man named Kerne Erickson, I learned that companies like Monsanto put their high level ex-corporate employees as the director of the FDA.

They do so because they know people like me are likely to believe an organization that is backed by the government.

Of course the commercial that supports “no” not only has an a former Monsanto-appointed FDA director; but Monsanto paid for the commercial to be aired.

Even Representative Dennis Kucinich has made a claim saying the reason GMO has not been required to label their foods is because they have influenced the FDA and corrupted them.

He also claims the GMO companies only came to the conclusion the GMO foods are not harmful because they never tested for toxins or harmful side affects. If all I had to do was say something was good without testing that does not make it good for people.

To make me even more mad the FDA’s research on GMOs is relied on the companies’ research, which does not make sense to me because if we rely on the companies then what is the point of having an FDA?

The GMO companies have spliced DNA from other plants and animals into the DNA of the crops. There is a way to splice crops but the true method is called cross pollination – not splicing.

Monsanto pays to have the commercials claim that there food is good for us, well I want to see an outside party say that. I want someone that will report the truth and not be paid by Monsanto so that way when they show the test results, I can actually say these are test results.

I don’t want this for just Prop 37, I want it for all props during all elections. I don’t want the government to dumb down the explanations of the props; I just feel like the people who write the props such as the political candidates are just trying to show off their degrees and education.

I understand that they might have a master’s or a doctorate in political science but they do not need to shove it in our face?

When Obama was first elected, I was reading a prop and they said they wanted to renovate money for something; why can’t they just say the word allocate? When I saw a commercial back then about Prop 6, they made it seem like it was about child abuse and even made a statement in the commercial saying “report child abuse.”

Prop 6 wasn’t even about or related to the issue of child abuse. This exact reason is why I feel the propaganda needs to stop. What if that prop 6 was about making a law saying if you have a child you must pay $5,000 monthly to the government for the child’s first 18 years?

In my own opinion it should be illegal for the companies to pay for the commercials or even have their own people within the government. If they do have a former employee within a branch then they should not help the companies unless it can truly be proven that there is nothing wrong with the product.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Comments

comments