Farmers trying to cultivate new image

Are farmers the new villains? Cast as uncaring louts in a major food documentary that opened nationwide Friday, conventional farmers already have seen their public persona trashed by bestselling depictions of conventional farms as places that abuse the land and the animals while producing food of low nutritional quality.

Weary of their standing among consumers, farmers, farm organ- izations and agribusinesses have begun spinning back with websites and YouTube videos, some done with slick narration and lighting. Field trips and speaking campaigns have been organized to "educate" urban media reporters and diners alike.

"They don't seem to believe anything we tell them," said Andy Quinn, a corn farmer and ethanol plant member in Litchfield, Minn.

The debate over what's served on your dinner plate comes at a portentous time for conventional farms and agribusiness, with a new Democratic administration in the White House that dines on food grown in the First Lady's back-yard garden. Perhaps not too surprisingly, agribusiness political donations this year have favored Democrats, a trend that's on track to make 2009 the first year in at least two decades in which Republicans don't take home a larger share of agribusiness donations.

The latest salvo, the documentary film "Food Inc.," which recently premiered around the country, comes with a Minnesota twist: One of its primary backers is River Road Entertainment, the company run by a son of the late Carl Pohlad that has produced hits like "Brokeback Mountain," "Into the Wild," and "Lust, Caution."

The film relies on interviews with Eric Schlosser, the author of "Fast Food Nation,'' and Michael Pollan, author of "The Omnivore's Dilemma,'' to make its point that corporations more concerned with profit than health control the nation's food supply.

"It's never been told as eloquently or as user-friendly as this film does," said Gary Hirschberg, the CEO of Stonyfield Farms and one of the film's stars.

The eloquence, in this case, depends on what side of the food debate you're on.

"Food film a bit much to stomach," grumbled a newsletter writer for the Wisconsin Farm Bureau Federation, a group that represents 43,000 farm families in Wisconsin.

Come on down

"I would invite those people coming out of that film to come down and visit our farm and look at the crops we raise, the animals we raise," said Kevin Papp, president of the Minnesota Farm Bureau. "Those of us in agriculture, we need to do a better job of making that connection with the consumers. We've got nothing to hide."

Brad Mitchell, a spokesman for Monsanto, which gets deeply critical coverage in the film, dismissed it as "obviously a political film, with political aspirations."

"We have a new political landscape in Washington, D.C., and they think the administration and a lot of the people in D.C. are open to this message,'' Mitchell said. "From our perspective, we're a little disappointed because we don't have anything against local and organic."

A spokesman for Cargill, meanwhile, said in a statement that consumers should view the film's message in context.

"We would raise a note of caution about 'one-size-fits-all' answers to a task as complex as nourishing 6 billion people who are so disparately situated across the world," the spokesman said. "Generally, open markets, which provide access to both locally and globally sourced food, are the most efficient means for people around the world to meet their food requirements with nutritious diets."

Monsanto went further, launching a website, www. monsanto.com/foodinc, that argues that the growing global demand for food will require conventional farming with fertilizers, herbicides and genetically modified seeds. It's an easy argument to make, actually, since organic food sales last year were a mere $24.6 billion, about 3.5 percent of total U.S. food sales, according to the Organic Trade Association. "A rounding error," joked Hirschberg, of Stonyfield Farms.

A second website created by several meat trade groups, www.safefoodinc.com, counters "Food Inc." point by point. (Sample question: "I've heard that it is possible to convert the world's agricultural system to the organic or 'slow food model.' Is that true?" Answer: It would be dangerously irresponsible and require 40 times more farmers than exist today.) The site includes video tours of conventional farms.

And in recent weeks, Minnesota corn farmers, who in an informal survey earlier this month said "uninformed public opinion" stands as one of the biggest threats to their industry, helped pay for a website (www.thehandthatfeedsus. org) that touts conventional farmers and farms.

Telling their story

The site touted recent trips by a group of farmers to New York City with the mission of educating "urban reporters" about their business. On another page, the website profiles a farmer who says he's not rich, but can't convince the "handful of zealots" who see his farm as a corporate agribusiness.

"Our members are concerned," said Doug Albin, president of the Minnesota Corn Growers Association. "They feel that they're being mischaracterized. We need to be out front telling the story."

He didn't know how much money the group spent on the website, which was sponsored by a handful of other farmers' groups.

It's not only websites, as the food debate has wide-ranging political undertones. In the first three months of this year, agribusiness donations to Democratic members of Congress surpassed those to Republican members for the first time in at least 20 years, according to public records compiled by OpenSecrets.org. Since 1990, about two-thirds to three-quarters of the money agribusinesses donated to Congress went to Republicans. So far this year, Democrats have snared 54 percent of more than $4 million in donations.

Driving to Boston Wednesday night to present the film there, Hirschberg said he expected even more agribusiness reaction to the film.

"I'm actually impressed by their restraint," he said. "In times past, lawsuits would have been filed by now."

Matt McKinney • 612-673-7329

The latest salvo, the documentary film "Food Inc.," which recently premiered around the country, comes with a Minnesota twist: one of its primary backers is River Road Entertainment, the company run by a son of the late Carl Pohlad that has produced hits like "Brokeback Mountain," "Into the Wild," and "Lust, Caution." The film relies on interviews with Eric Schlosser, the author of "Fast Food Nation,'' and Michael Pollan, author of "Omnivore's Dilemma,'' to make its point that corporations more concerned with profit than health control the nation's food supply. "It's never been told as eloquently or as user-friendly as this film does," said Gary Hirschberg, the CEO of Stonyfield Farms and one of the film's stars. The eloquence, in this case, depends on what side of the food debate you're on. "Food film a bit much to stomach," grumbled a newsletter writer for the Wisconsin Farm Bureau Federation, a group that represents 43,000 farm families in Wisconsin. Come on down "I would invite those people coming out of that film to come down and visit our farm and look at the crops we raise, the animals we raise," said Kevin Papp, president of the Minnesota Farm Bureau. "Those of us in agriculture we need to do a better job of making that connection with the consumers. We've got nothing to hide." Brad Mitchell, a spokesman for Monsanto, which gets deeply critical coverage in the film. dimissed it as "obviously a political film, with political aspirations." "We have a new political landscape in Washington, D.C., and they think the administration and a lot of the people in D.C. are open to this message,'' Mitchell said. "From our perspective, we're a little disappointed because we don't have anything against local and organic." A spokesman for Cargill, meanwhile, said in a statement that consumers should view the film's message in context. "We would raise a note of caution about "one-size-fits-all" answers to a task as complex as nourishing 6 billion people who are so disparately situated across the world," the spokesman said. "Generally, open markets, which provide access to both locally and globally sourced food, are the most efficient means for people around the world to meet their food requirements with nutritious diets." Monsanto went further, launching a website, www.monsanto.com/foodinc/ , that argues the growing global demand for food will require conventional farming with fertilizers, herbicides and genetically modified seeds. It's an easy argument to make, actually, since organic food sales last year were a mere $24.6 billion, about 3.5 percent of total U.S. food sales, according to the Organic Trade Association. "A rounding error," joked Hirschberg, of Stonyfield Farms. A second website created by several meat trade groups, www.safefoodinc.com, counters "Food Inc." point by point. (Sample question: "I've heard that it is possible to convert the world's agricultural system to the organic or "slow food model." Is that true?" Answer: It would be dangerously irresponsible and require 40 times more farmers than exist today.) The site include video tours of conventional farms. And in recent weeks, Minnesota corn farmers, who in an informal survey earlier this month said "uninformed public opinion" stands as one of the biggest threats to their industry, helped pay for a website (www.thehandthatfeedsus.org) that touts conventional farmers and farms. Telling their story The site touted recent trips by a group of farmers to New York City with the mission of educating "urban reporters" about their business. On another page, the website profiles a farmer who says he's not rich, but can't convince the "handful of zealots" who see his farm as a corporate agribusiness. "Our members are concerned," said Doug Albin, president of the Minnesota Corn Growers Association. "They feel that they're being mischaracterized. We need to be out front telling the story." He didn't know how much money the group spent on the website, which was sponsored by a handful of other farmer's groups. It's not only websites, as the food debate has wide ranging political undertones. In the first three months of this year, agribusiness donations to Democratic members of Congress surpassed those to Republican members for the first time in at least 20 years, according to public records compiled by OpenSecrets.Org. Since 1990, about two thirds to three quarters of the money agribusinesses donated to Congress went to Republicans. So far this year, Democrats have snared 54 percent of more than $4 million in donations. Driving to Boston Wednesday night to present the film there, Hirschberg said he expected even more agribusiness reaction to the film. "I'm actually impressed by their restraint," he said. "In times past, lawsuits would have been filed by now." Matt McKinney • 612-673-7329