Blog 9: Media Use & Effects in Agricultural Communications

First a little housekeeping: Hopefully you saw my announcement on K-State Online that I ended up manually assigning peer reviews. I have pushed the deadline back to October 30th because of this delay. You can see more details on the In-Depth Theory assignment page. I am sorry for any inconvenience this causes. Update: While grading I noticed some of you were assigned peer reviews, so if you were assigned a peer review and already completed it, you do not have to complete another one. You may still want to review the PDF so you can see all of your peers’ infographics and learn a little more about all of the theories.

Take a minute and think about how you learn about current events affecting agriculture. How do use media in this process? What media do you select? Now, think about another topic that you are completely unfamiliar with. How do you learn about it? What role does media play in your understanding? How are these two processes different for you? How are they the same? What does this tell you about how people unfamiliar with agriculture may learn about it? What did you learn is this week’s readings that could help you improve this process?

Sorry to begin with so many questions, but I think it helps to put us in the right frame of mind when discussing the role of media in agricultural communications. We all know that the number of journalists with a specific ag beat has dropped dramatically. Reporters are now asked to cover multiple topics and likely take the pictures and video associated with the stories and upload it to the web or a blog themselves. Very few members of mainstream media understand agriculture, but I hope you realized from this week’s readings that we cannot make grand claims about the media’s power to corrupt (or save) society. Media is one piece of the entire puzzle. People do not absorb 100% of the content they come in to contact with and personal characteristics play a huge role. The theories discussed in this week’s readings play a large role in our understanding of how people process and seek information. If you were seeking to change a person’s attitude toward the handling of livestock, which theory from this week do you think would help explain the process best? Would you select a different theory if you were trying to change a farmer’s attitude toward adopting new technology?

As you are learning in the peer review process, scholars do not always agree. From disagreement arises some of the world’s best discoveries. As scholars you shouldn’t just accept things the way they are. Ask questions, challenge the norm, and test the theories you find issue with. You may disprove what another scholar has found, or convince yourself that the theory should stand. As you read through chapter 14, was there a place where you questioned the author’s claims or how they were presented? Was your reception the result of negotiated meaning or an outright oppositional decoding situation?   



22 thoughts on “Blog 9: Media Use & Effects in Agricultural Communications

  1. If I need information on current events affecting agriculture, I often go to major ag media sources like U.S. Farm Report or Farm Journal as my first source of information. Because I trust these media sources and believe that they have similar a similar background and values as I do, I am displaying selective exposure and selective perception theory. To learn about a topic I am completely unfamiliar with, I often just do a Google search. I am less likely to consult TV for a new topic, and am often more suspicious of my online sources of information, looking at several different ones before forming an opinion on what information is credible. Similarly to the agricultural example, I am displaying selective perception theory, however, I consult more sources beforehand.
    This tells me that people who are unfamiliar with agriculture probably learn about it in a similar way to how I learn about something I am unfamiliar with. They are more suspicious of sources and take several into consideration before forming an opinion. The agriculture industry could try to capitalize on the fraction of selection theory by making their information appear in many different places so that as people look to learn about agriculture they can find a message to fulfill their many different needs.
    To attempt to change a person’s attitude toward the handling of livestock, I would employ aspects of both individual differences theory and attitude change research. Using information from both of these theories would help me craft a message that would take into account both the reader’s personal opinions and the factors needed to change their attitude. This could help tailor the message to a specific group and make it as effective as possible.
    I would use both aforementioned theories to change a farmer’s attitude toward new technology as well because they would still help tailor the message to the audience in an effective way. I could also use elements from the diffusion of innovations theory to learn more about how audiences perceive technology changes and then apply that information to the farmers.
    As I read chapter 14, I questioned the author’s claims on the transmission of culture as a function of media. Because there is such a bulk of different media today, I do not think media transmits culture as much as it did before the widespread use of the internet. When everyone watched the same three TV channels because they were all that was available, culture was more transmitted through media. Today, however, so many people interact with so many different forms of media that no clear culture can be evenly or effectively transmitted. This disagreement is due to negotiated meaning because the textbook is older. So when the book was initially published, the neutral meaning of their statement was probably true, but as a reader in 2018 I have injected my own opinions and knowledge into my perceived meaning of the message.

    1. Elizabeth, you make a good point about the fact that media transmits more widespread than it used to because of the fact that the internet is so common in today’s society and there is an unlimited amount of information at our fingertips.

    2. Elizabeth, I certainly agree with you. We have such easy access to so many different forms of media today. I think you make some valid points how culture does not transfer as well today as it did years ago; however, I think that may be more applicable in the agricultural world than in the “main stream” world. I think there are still differing culture influences across geographical and demographical barriers.

  2. When I want to learn about current events in agriculture, I usually Farm Bureau News and U.S. Farm Report. I use the media to read articles about the topic I am looking for and then if I still have questions I often do a google search and look for websites that are reputable. I prefer text media, but I do listen to some podcasts for information. For topics I am unfamiliar with I usually do a google search and try to find 5-10 articles that look reputable and make sure they all include the same basic information. Media plays a huge role in my understanding of information. I use media to learn about almost all information I do not know about because I usually do not have readily accessible textbook information and much of the information I need is not going to be found in a textbook anyways. They are the same because I usually look for articles instead of video news and podcasts. This tells me that many people who are unfamiliar with agriculture probably do google searches to get their information and this makes it important for us to know what information shows up. One thing that I noticed in the reading was that “the web is the most flexible venue for choosing explanations.” I never thought about it like that, but I get almost all of my information from the web because of my busy schedule and I don’t have to be watching television at a certain time and everything is at the click of a button.
    To change a person’s attitude about livestock handling I would use cognitive dissonance theory because the information we would be presenting would more than likely be new information that would not be consistent with preexisting attitudes and beliefs.
    If I was trying to change a farmer’s attitude toward adopting a new technology I would definitely use a different theory! For this, I would use the diffusion of innovations theory because most farmers are not going to be early adopters, but rather laggards.
    When I read chapter 14, I found myself questioning the information processing theory. It mentioned that we only take in a small fraction of the information that we are given each day because of the constant feed of information that we are given and while I find that partially true, I think we often times do not take in as much information because of the fact that we either do not understand the information being given to us or we do not agree with the information being given to us.

    1. Tabitha,

      You make a good point about using cognitive dissonance theory to change opinions about livestock handling. It did not initially occur to me to take that into account, but I think it would make the communication much more effective.

    2. Tabitha,

      I would agree with you on the fact that media can become our main learning source because we aren’t always located near a book of information or sometimes have the time to go search through a book for the direct information we want. I would agree with the comment you mentioned from the reading, “the web is the most flexible venue for choosing explanations.”

    3. Tabitha,

      I agree that a big reason we do not take in as much information is because we don’t agree with it. It seems like a lot of people are not open minded to new information that doesn’t align with their beliefs. The agriculture industry suffers from this because when the general public that believes some of the false information that is distributed they don’t always give us the opportunity to show them the other side of it.

  3. When I am looking to connect and learn more about current events affecting agriculture, I typically will start with Twitter. I find that social media platform to update quickly, exhibit broad perspectives of all parties and direct me to other supporting resources on the topic. I also enjoy our regional agricultural newspaper, publishing information on the industry from across the eastern seaboard. If it is a topic that I am less familiar with, I am quick to do a quick google check or again check in with Twitter. We don’t have cable TV so other media outlets like the news or even the local newspaper are not avenues that I have frequent access to. Both situations are fairly similar for me. I trust the accounts that I follow on Twitter and I enjoy exploring new platforms that I may encounter with or interact with while browsing. I also think I am drawn to the social media platform for times sake, with a busy schedule sitting down to watch the news sometimes seems like a foreign concept.

    My experiences in the agriculture industry have helped me determine who the trustworthy and factual accounts are. This would be challenging for individuals outside of the industry, a blue checkmark beside their handle doesn’t necessarily signify they are the most reliable source. I think that those that have limited agricultural knowledge are affected by the concept of opinion leaders and followers. We see this in the activists groups that form regarding various agricultural topics and issues (GMO’s, Organic vs Conventional, Ethical Animal Treatment). Someone has to start the conversation.

    When considering how to help educate an individuals attitude towards livestock handling, I think the application of the social learning tool and observational learning. I think it is debatable to say whether or not TV is still the “primary tool for teaching;” in fact I would argue that it is YouTube where were turn to learn new things. Using this platform for live farm tours, farmer interviews or mini-lessons from veterinarians could be an avenue to change perspective to a more educated, positive light. I don’t believe this theory or method would be as successful in helping train and convert farmers to adopt a few form of technology. Knowing and working with farmers, most of which are older than 40 and have a natural barrier with technology, I think the information processing theory is more appropriate here. The most useful information needs sorted out and organized in a simplified, not overwhelming way. This will help the individual feel like they have what it takes to adopt this new method.

    There were a few areas where I felt as though the author was missing the recognition of different media platforms. Whether that be social media, radio, podcasts, other forms of print, we encounter information in so many different capacities. Some of this may be the date of the publication, of course. With that also, we interact with such an incredible amount of information a day, because we have such easy access to it. I agreed with the authors perspective on that and how that applied to information processing theory (as discussed above) as well as diffusion theory in how interpretations of an issue may look, sound and feel differently in Pennsylvania than in Kansas.

    1. Janae,

      I hadn’t thought of going to Twitter as a first source of ag information, but you’re completely right. Social platforms do usually update quickly and offer a more broad range of ideas. I also like your thoughts on Twitter source reliability. I think it is easy to assure ourselves of a source’s credibility if they have a blue check mark. However, becoming verified on Twitter and tweeting credible information don’t always go hand-in-hand, and we should constantly be aware by fact-checking those sources.

    2. Janea,

      I also look to Twitter for up-to-date information from agricultural news sites. it is also easy to look up opinions from the opposition, because they are updating their sites just as quickly or more quickly than the reliable pro-modern ag pages do. I also agree that being verified on social media is not a guarantee that they are posting legitimate credible information. Many celebrities and non-profit organizations are proof of that. This is why I only trust sources that use information found in peer-reviewed articles using both quantitative and qualitative methods of research.

    3. Janae,
      I appreciate your thought regarding reliability and social media accounts. Many celebrities use their platforms to promote things they believe in and support. Just because an account is verified does not mean that they always share factual or reliable information regarding any topic, not just agriculture. It is quite easy for celebrities to use their platforms to sway their followers towards their own beliefs, which clearly has positive and negative repercussions.

  4. When viewing media in agriculture I tend to look at multiple sources to check the creditability of the source. For example when looking at a news article that pops up on Facebook or Twitter I am more likely to search that topic somewhere else to make sure that the information being shared is correct. However with an agriculture topic I feel that it is easier to determine the credibility then a topic I have no previous knowledge with. When looking at topics that I am not familiar with or as knowledgable about I am more likely to reach out to someone if I am dedicated to the news topic if I can’t find out more information in a quick manner. With news or topics in the media I am more likely to be interested if the information is quick to discover, if it takes a lot of time I tend to loose interest in the topic. I can understand why those that aren’t familiar with agriculture would have the same viewpoint as I do. I tend to see this attitude for me more with political topics that don’t effect agriculture.

    “The web is the most flexible venue for choosing explanations” was a quote that stuck out to me. I have realized through teaching different courses that many people rely on google for the quick an easy answer. I believe this to be true for people that aren’t involved in agriculture. If they don’t know what a reliable source for agriculture to be google or a media source is their best option.

    When looking at a theory that could be successful in changing the attitudes of people toward handling livestock, I would use the cognitive dissonance theory. This theory would be successful in my opinion because the information is new and wouldn’t fall with any previous beliefs or opinions based on the person. When changing a farmer’s viewpoint on technology I think that using the social learning tool. I find that even with my father that is not technology driven is learning a lot about his new technology in farming from social tools.

    When reading chapter 14 there wasn’t much that I that I found myself questioning. The one thing that got me thinking was the information processing theory. The reading mentioned we only take in a small amount of information in a day. I would agree with that, however does that small amount of information come from a particular part of the day or does it just occur over an entire day. As a teacher I notice that some things students will remember better than others partially from attention span but also does it have to do with the time of day that they are learning it?

    1. Michelle,

      I found your last comment about your students remembering certain things better than others very interesting. I wonder if there would be a correlation between the students’ perceptions and the content that you are discussing? Maybe something that you talked about challenged what they thought they already knew and they remember it because it did challenge them to think differently. When I was younger, subjects that caused more of a discussion or debate were things that I would remember. That may be the same with your students where they remember something that they could argue for or against; again something that challenged them. Lots to think about on that.

  5. I have go-to sources I visit online when I need to learn about current events affecting agriculture. These include Agri-Pulse, Ag Web, Missouri Farmer Today, Missouri Ruralist and Brownfield Ag News. I like to check multiple platforms to read several accounts of the events, both at the national and local level. On the other hand, if I am looking to learn about a topic I am unfamiliar with, I usually do a general Google search. The media plays a different role in this Google search than it does when I am going directly to agricultural sites I trust. The ag sites I visit are more constant and I already perceive them to be trustworthy. When performing a Google search, I have to take the time to dig through multiple sources to determine credibility. The information provided is also more variable since I don’t have specific sites I am visiting. One thing that remains the same between the two types of information gathers is my desire for multiple sources. I like to find multiple stories about the same event or topic to ensure I receive information from different points of view.

    This difference in my personal information-gathering habits tells me a lot about how people unfamiliar with agriculture may learn about the industry. The first couple of links to pop up on the Google results page are probably going to be the links that provide information to someone unfamiliar with agriculture. It takes some work to determine the credibility of a source, so if that person unfamiliar with ag doesn’t put the time into determining the reliability of the Google results, they may only be receiving the misinformation represented in their Google search.

    This week, we learned about the Media Dependency Theory, which I think can be used to explain why we use media in the way we do when we are unfamiliar with a topic. The Media Dependency Theory explains that the more dependent we are on the media, the greater effect it has on us. So, when we are depending entirely on the media to provide us information about an unfamiliar topic, that media we consume is likely to have a big effect on our beliefs and opinions regarding the topic.

    If I were seeking to change a person’s attitude toward handling livestock, I would use the Cognitive Dissonance Theory. I would be sure to recognize that the new information could cause some discomfort, or dissonance, if the individual held differing beliefs. I think I would try to become familiar with their current beliefs to align the new information presented with the way their mind thinks. In doing this, I would hopefully help them turn the dissonance into consonance in a quick and accurate way. I think I would use the same theory if trying to change a farmer’s attitude toward new technology.

    In Chapter 14, we learned about a theory called Fraction of Selection. I agree with the theory’s claim that people choose media based on what media function they seek to have most fulfilled. However, I don’t agree with the idea that expected reward is considered against effort required. This may have previously been true, but today all types of information are available in multiple media forms. I think today the decision is made based more on a preference for media type versus a consideration of effort required to consume that media type. I believe my reception is the result of negotiated meaning.

    1. Brandelyn,

      I was on the fence about utilizing the cognitive dissonance theory to change the publics’ attitude on livestock handling, but I like how you went on to explain that you would try to learn their current beliefs and modify your message to align more closely with what they already believe to reduce the dissonance.

  6. When I want to learn about current events affecting agriculture, I tend to gravitate towards agricultural news pages or journals as my source of information. Most of these sites are ones that I believe are credible and reputable sources. Depending on the topic, I may also search for the subject on YouTube and see if there are any videos on the topic. While there are several people out there who prefer to learn about these events on social media, I feel that certain events may be more of a target to others on social media and could be misconstrued into a different story. To explain this better, let’s say an animal health/feed manufacturer comes out with a different feed supplement or a new vaccine. To producers, that may be fantastic news for their operations. Unfortunately, depending on who sees that on social media, it could be a target for anti-agricultural organizations to add fuel to the fire of the many accusations of producers doing nothing except feeding animals hormones and injecting them with antibiotics. I think there’s a fine line of what should go on social media and what should not, hence why I tread lightly with social media.

    Now, onto the opposite and a topic that I am completely unfamiliar with. My first step is doing a Google search and looking out for what I would consider credible and reputable resources. Most times, blog posts are the most common items to come up, but I tend to veer away from reading those blogs because each of those blogs will have a different opinion/story. I would argue that most people who go into a search for new information will go into the search with a preconceived notion and are looking for reassurance that their notion is correct, or enough evidence to overturn their original opinion, or as the book referred it, selective perception. I would also look into YouTube videos for any recent news stories in regards to the subject matter. This method is very similar to the first process, except I will likely venture to several more sites or sources for the new information. People who are unfamiliar with agriculture are likely to do the same where they will perform a Google search and these results and research will either reassure or potentially change their opinion.

    If I was planning to change a person’s attitude toward the handling of livestock, the cognitive dissonance theory would explain this well. Someone who is unfamiliar with agriculture and livestock may go into the conversation with a notion that animal handling is not done properly and may disagree with confinement, alleys, or chutes. If they were to view a video from Temple Grandin about low stress cattle handling which would challenge their prior information, they may feel uncomfortable with the new information. With enough information, they may change their attitude on the subject. This theory would also relate if I were trying to change a farmer’s attitude toward adopting new technology, but this type of a situation could also relate to selective perception or selective exposure.

    While reading through Chapter 14, there really wasn’t a whole lot to question. The only thing that stuck out to me was when the author stated that “we do not have the time to process the first information before new stimuli bombards us in many mediated instances.” I would argue that the brain processes the information that the individual wants to hear/process. We may have developed selective hearing to overcome this information overload. In this instance, the brain will be able to pick out target words that will then capture the person’s attention and will then process that information. When listening to the news, I may zone out on certain stories, not because it is information overload, but because the information does not pertain to my interest. Once someone mentions “weather,” then that word will spark my interest and I will then process the information. I can see the author’s point of view with respect to children processing of information. For them, I would agree with the statement of being overloaded. They may still be trying to find out point A, but the story has already moved on to point B. Some TV shows such as Blue’s Clues or Mickey Mouse Clubhouse overcame this when they stop to “ask the children” a question during the show and allow them the time to process the information and solve a problem.

  7. A lot of my information about current events in agriculture stems from social media. I see something while browsing my news feeds that triggers interest, and then look into it from there. There are a few places I go to when seeking out information: BEEF magazine, Ag Daily and Farm Journal sources, to name a few. I use these sources because I trust them and have used them in the past. I use online media to access this information because I go through their websites. On occasion, I will browse through a newsletter or physical magazine, but 90 percent of the time I rely on my phone or laptop to view content. When looking for information on a topic I am unfamiliar with, I will ask others that may have more knowledge, or I will do a Google search and browse until I find a source that seems trustworthy (.edu, .gov, etc.). I rarely turn elsewhere for information. I don’t watch television often and I rarely listen to the radio outside of my five-minute commute to and from campus every day. If I see something that interests me in a newspaper or magazine, I will pick it up and read through it, but this is a rare occurrence. While these processes are different for me, I try to go to a trusted source rather than whatever pops up at the top of the Google search page to gain information on a topic. I’m afraid that people unfamiliar to agriculture find an “offensive” headline that grabs their attention (cue “dairy milk is a symbol of white supremacy,” PETA) and use that as their source of information rather than perusing land grant pages to learn from professionals.

    If I were seeking to change a person’s attitude toward livestock handling, I would try to engage the reception theory. This theory states that delivery of a message influences the reception by the audience. If a confident, knowledgeable individual that has superb communication skills is sharing information on the handling of livestock, the audience is more likely to trust them. Alternatively, if you had a well-known and liked personality discuss the topic in a positive light, you’d be more likely to gain attention from the audience. When trying to change a farmer’s attitude towards adopting new technology, I would be likely to employ the diffusion of innovations theory. Farmers like to see that new technology is effective and worth the money before investing. If early adopters are benefitting from the use of new technology, it will eventually flow down the line to the smallest of farmers. Adoption of a technology is largely influenced by economics, but social systems still play a role.

    I can’t say I really disagreed with or questioned any of the author’s theories during chapter 14. I am on the fence about the presentation of the reception theory – I think I have my own understanding of it, but I’m not certain I have a full grasp on the theory due to the explanation provided. From what I understand, the reception theory is based more on how a message is perceived from the message disseminator.

    -Rachel Waggie

  8. When I am looking for information pertaining to agriculture, I use sources like the Farm Journal or Drovers. I follow a lot of agriculture facebook pages, so that is where my research usually starts. They typically share different articles and they lead me to research further into topics that I’m interested in. However, when I see things on social media that I don’t know much about, I’m far less likely to research them. The only time I do much outside research on topics I’m not familiar with is if it’s controversial. I don’t think I’m alone in this and I can see where this causes a problem for agriculture. Those who aren’t actively involved in agriculture might see articles or graphics that have incorrect information about our industry, but they take it for face value and don’t do their own research. This is how a lot of false information is spread and unfortunately I don’t know what can be done to combat it. Our society is so overran with media and information, we have to sort through things based on our own priorities and those who aren’t involved in agriculture aren’t going to take the time to research it and learn for themselves what is accurate and what isn’t.

    For changing someone’s perspective on technology, I think the information processing theory would be useful. Producers already have their own beliefs and ways of doing things. By prioritizing the information in a way that works for them, I think they would be more open to it. I also think it would be important to keep it very basic and if they’re interested, they will research more into it. I’ve never seen forcing things on producers work very well.

    Like some others in the class have mentioned, I think the topics of culture and the media in this chapter are a little off. Culture and media are both so broad in our society today, it’s hard to really follow the information in this chapter. I think people choose the media they follow based on their culture, but there are so many different ways we get information now we can’t really say one culture relies more heavily on certain media. I do agree with the authors that because there is so much information thrown at us, we’re more selective about what we take in than we have been in the past.

  9. When learning about new agricultural events, I look towards Facebook and Instagram for updated articles and clips. I know which pages and accounts to follow because I have lived and worked in this industry for a long time. Also, the past few stories I have read on Facebook have linked the peer-reviewed research study that they received their information from.

    When learning about new topics, I usually find them when I am scrolling because one of my friends has shared a link, or I hear it on the radio or TV. If I want to learn more about it I look to Google for reliable websites or Google Scholar for peer-reviewed articles discussing the topic.

    These processes are fairly similar. I usually hear or see something in the media that peaks my interest and then I go to research it if I would like to know more or clarify what I heard about the topic.

    I know most people are not like me. They do not take the time to search for reliable, credible sources. They might not know how to or they might not think about it. Sometimes I think it is part of the job description as a grad student to find those real sources of information. It seems to be how I spend a fair share of my time anyway.

    People who are unfamiliar with agriculture find their information through media as well, but they learn through what their friends follow or what they have looked up previously, because this is how Facebook decides what information to post to your feed. Facebook takes into account what your closest friends are sharing and liking and what you have shared, liked, and looked up in the past to decide what you will most likely enjoy seeing on your feed or what you are most likely to like. This is partly why I very rarely see any stories that show agriculture in a bad light, because everyone I am friends with supports conventional agriculture. Some of today’s agricultural bloggers try to get around this Facebook calculation by using hashtags from anti-agricultural accounts such as #vegan or #nonGMO and many others.

    If I were trying to change someone’s opinion of livestock handling, I would probably use observational learning. I would take them on farm tours, show them videos and handbooks from PQA and BQA instructors, and have them discuss proper handling with a veterinarian.

    If I was going to convince a farmer to adopt new technology, I first would assess what generation that farmer was a part of. A millennial farmer would be interested in how this technology would stream line the daily processes of farming. A Baby boomer farmer would be interested more in the results other farmers have personally experienced and would like to hear those experiences directly from that farmer typically over a meal, coffee, or a beer.

    I did not really disagree with anything the author was saying. The book is copyrighted in 2004, so it does not have the most up-to-date information regarding social media. This is probably the only area where I did not find this material completely relatable.

  10. The most trusted news source I seek out for agriculture is the U.S. Farm Report. If I am unfamiliar with a topic, like many others I start with a Google search. I am leary of sources that aren’t from a reputable site. One common rule of thumb people put into practice is to look for sites with URL’s that include .org or .edu in them. Also, media plays a large role in how I intake information, as I am certain it does for many. I try to be certain that the media I am following comes from well-known and trusted sources, but even then I will typically cross reference the information I receive to ensure it is accurate. Obviously for those who aren’t familiar with agriculture, they are probably taking a similar approach, unfortunately they might not know what sources are considered trustworthy or they might not be able to tell when information needs cross referencing. The concerning part is that the untrained eye can’t always identify bias in media either, when combined with personal beliefs, this can be detrimental in seeking the truth regarding news. Media dependency and the knowledge gap can also be taken into consideration when it comes to information intake. Younger generations are dependent upon it as a primary news and information source, whereas older generations or less educated are less likely to seek out or have access to media, and can have trouble discerning the truth (admittedly this is stereotyping and assuming while making a generalization).

    I feel that the cognitive dissonance theory would be beneficial for helping people understand the importance of, and the concepts within, proper livestock handling. Bias would be limited and perception could be influenced with the new information regarding the topic if you take the time to incorporate your audience’s personal beliefs. This same theory could be applied to changing a farmer’s attitude regarding new technology.

    I didn’t question the content in chapter 14, I was however very interested in the information about how much content we truly intake. As both a student and instructor I see this playing out in the classes I teach, and in my own ability to focus during certain course content. I can even see this playing out when I am trying to keep up with all the reading for my different classes. I have certainly made it sound as though I have a short attention span, but I have noticed that my ability to focus and grasp content improves with hand-written note taking, after a snack, or even just a quick walk to the bathroom and back during long lectures. Many educators take the time to research this topic and implement preventative measures in their own classrooms to help students with information recall. Because of the constant bombardment of information through social media, phones, news, etc. it can be difficult to maintain the attention of students even with certain measures in place.

    1. I strongly agree that content accumulation is a topic that is currently being discussed within higher education and although some alternatives have been put into practice, the level of retention is reduced every time. The combination of various sources of information based on storytelling, case studies, videos, debates and physical movement are the basis of good learning in a short time.

  11. Currently, people in the countryside must see the importance and impact that media platforms have on people. Social networks have two sides: absorbing or promoting information. There is a large number of them that can help producers to find a specific product or offer their services.

    Greater approach to consumers and potential customers by knowing their real needs, increased sales, strengthening the presence of brands and businesses in the market and access to a greater number of customers with a low investment, are some of the windows that open when inserting a business in the world of social networks.

    They can be very useful in the agricultural sector to document and find information in different parts of the world. To give examples: irrigation or sowing techniques, find experts in agriculture or livestock.

    Currently, we have the advantage that communication is very dynamic, and because of this there is a large amount of content available. The use of social networks is a fundamental element to stay up to date and stay informed in everything that is happening around the field, of new techniques or machinery to innovate and improve production.

    In the case about person attitude about livestock handling, one of the theories that can be used is cognitive dissonance, which explains how people try to maintain their internal consistency. It suggests that individuals have a strong inner need that pushes them to make sure that their beliefs, attitudes and behavior are coherent with each other. When there is inconsistency between them, the conflict leads to a lack of harmony, something that people strive to avoid.

    This theory can be defined as the discomfort, tension or anxiety that individuals experience when their beliefs or attitudes conflict with what they do. This displeasure can lead to an attempt to change behavior or to defend their beliefs or attitudes (even coming to self-deception) to reduce the discomfort they produce.

Leave a Reply