The evolution of words

Ag-related terminology takes on new meaning with everyday use.
Posted September 01, 2005
By Laura Schafer
Food Systems Insider

England’s potato farmers are angry. They believe that unfair parallels have been made between their product and unhealthy behavior. What has the British Potato Council in an uproar? The phrase “couch potato.” This idiom started as American slang meaning “a person who spends leisure time passively or idly sitting around, especially watching television or video tapes.” The council believes that this unhealthy definition is giving the vegetable a bad image. But even after protests, editors of the Oxford English Dictionary insist that words are rarely taken out of the dictionary, and this is no exception.

Is this an isolated case? Or have words really taken on lives of their own?

Sustainable agriculture
Sustainable agriculture is an approach to farming that allows resources to be renewed and reused over time. Sustainable equals long term, and this is what all producers want their operations to be.

However, the organic movement’s use of this word has made it almost synonymous with organic agriculture. The Organic Consumers Association declares it “promotes organic food and sustainable agriculture.” Sustainable farming does suggest limiting inputs, but as the organic segment grows and uses the word “sustainable,” it has morphed into meaning using only natural inputs, if any.

An article in The Herald Sun of Durham, N.C., quoted a farm-festival organizer: “We’d focus on how things used to be done, and where things are going in the future in relation to sustainable agriculture, i.e. organic, fresh, locally produced.”

Even more extreme is an editorial from the San Francisco Chronicle arguing against animal agriculture. The writer mentions that “only a plant-based diet is truly sustainable.”

“‘Sustainable’ can be confusing to the public,” says Bill Allen, a professor of agricultural journalism at the University of Missouri who was in the news business for 28 years. “It’s used too loosely. I wonder how many members of the general public know what that means.”

Factory farm
“I think the term ‘factory farm’ might have been originally coined as a pejorative by animal activists,” says Chuck Jolley, who has been involved in the meat and poultry industry for 30 years and is president of Jolley and Associates. What activists call “factory farms” are known more formally as concentrated-animal-feeding operations. These operations use large-scale methods of raising animals for human consumption.

Allen points out that the term “factory farm” leaves a cold and industrial feeling and makes farming feel less personal. “Factory farm” is often used by activists who may describe a CAFO’s method of operations as cruel, inhumane and environmentally irresponsible.

One activist Web site (www.factoryfarming.com) provides its definition: “Factory farming is an attitude that regards animals and the natural world merely as commodities to be exploited for profit. In animal agriculture, this attitude has led to institutionalized animal cruelty, massive environmental destruction and resource depletion, and animal and human health risks.”

“This is a definition loaded with emotional terms and hyperbole,” Allen says. “For example, the word ‘attitude’ is meant to imply ‘meanness.’ ‘Merely’ implies ‘careless inhumanity,’ as does ‘exploited.’ ‘Cruelty’ is an obviously emotional term. ‘Massive’ is a hype term. ‘Health risks’ is a phrase that can be read as scientific (quantitative) or a scare term, depending on the context. Well, given the sentences and phrases that precede the phrase, it reads like a scare term here.”

Family farm
The USDA defines a family farm as one that produces enough agricultural products to be recognized by the community as a farm and not just a rural residence, produces enough income (including off-farm employment) to cover farm expenses, is managed by the operator and involves a substantial amount of work done by family members.

The family farm is something held by many as a sentimental ideal. “The general press uses this term to evoke a Norman Rockwellian image of lush pastures and contented cows,” Jolley says.

An editorial from The New York Times discusses how the image of the family farm can be used politically: “Politics tends to exploit easily romanticized icons, and the family farm has not been spared. … It has been hijacked as an excuse to betray America’s free-market values and hurt developing countries.”The Web site www.sustainabletable.org uses the ideology of the family farm in efforts against corporate agriculture: “Perhaps most importantly, family farmers serve as responsible stewards of the land. Unlike industrial agriculture operations, which contaminate communities with chemical pesticides, noxious fumes and excess manure, small family farmers strive to preserve the surrounding environment for future generations.”

“The family farm is like apple pie, it’s hard to argue against,” Allen says. “The family farm is what made America great.”

Local food
Local food is a branch of sustainability. It is the idea of buying and living off local products when possible. This can mean shopping at local farmers’ markets or buying from a roadside stand.
Buying locally is a growing consumer trend. In August, a group of women declared themselves “locavores” and ate only what could be produced within 100 miles of their homes in San Francisco. Local products are often thought of by consumers to be safer and grown using fewer chemicals and better animal-treatment practices.

“It’s supposed to mean fresh, just-harvested-an-hour-ago and rushed to the farmers’ market located less than 20 miles away,” Jolley says, “probably by the freckle-faced kids running the family farm.”

An article in the Indiana Star Press discussed the possibility of a college campus offering local foods in its cafeterias. The banquet and catering sales and service supervisor was quoted as saying, “And because the food would be local, there’s no doubt it would be better ... It’d taste like real food.”

“In reality, a close definition is ‘picked this week somewhere in the general vicinity,’” Jolley says. “It could be the same kind of wrapped-in-plastic tomato you get year-round at the supermarket.”

Organic and natural
Some consumers see organic as meaning “better for you,” and they are willing to pay higher prices for organic foods. A piece from The Palm Beach Post quotes the executive director of Florida Certified Organic Growers and Consumers Inc. as saying, “For most consumers, buying organic foods -- those produced without the use of synthetic chemicals, antibiotics and hormones -- is all about health.”

“Consumers think of it as free of risk,” Allen says, “whereas it could be just smaller concentrations of chemicals. The implication of ‘organic’ is healthier and more natural.”
Natural products are those that contain no artificial ingredients, coloring ingredients or chemical preservatives, and are minimally processed. Natural meats are often considered to be grass-fed and use no growth hormones.

“Both (organic and natural) have been so overused and interchangeable in the public eye that they have little real value other than to evoke a marketing image of something more wholesome than what can be produced on a factory farm,” Jolley says.

These examples aren’t as extreme as England’s “couch potato” conundrum, but the misuse and misinterpretation of these words is a battle that those in the agriculture industry must face. It’s important to realize how these words are being used by consumers, activists and the media, and to know how to clarify their true, original meanings.

© 2005 Vance Publishing Corp.