Search results

Consumers’ trust in food systems is essential to their functioning and to consumers’ well-being. However, the literature exploring how food safety incidents impact consumer trust is theoretically underdeveloped. This study explores the relationship between consumers’ expectations of the food system and its actors (regulators, food industry and the media) and how these influence trust-related judgements that consumers make during a food safety incident.

In this study, two groups of purposefully sampled Australian participants (n = 15) spent one day engaged in qualitative public deliberation to discuss unfolding food incident scenarios. Group discussion was audio recorded and transcribed for the analysis. Facilitated group discussion included participants' expected behaviour in response to the scenario and their perceptions of actors' actions described within the scenario, particularly their trust responses (an increase, decrease or no change in their trust in the food system) and justification for these.

The findings of the study indicated that food incident features and unique consumer characteristics, particularly their expectations of the food system, interacted to form each participant's individual trust response to the scenario. Consumer expectations were delineated into “fundamental” and “anticipatory” expectations. Whether fundamental and anticipatory expectations were in alignment was central to the trust response. Experiences with the food system and its actors during business as usual contributed to forming anticipatory expectations.

To ensure that food incidents do not undermine consumer trust in food systems, food system actors must not only demonstrate competent management of the incident but also prioritise trustworthiness during business as usual to ensure that anticipatory expectations held by consumers are positive.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the views of journalists, food regulators and the food industry representatives on the impact of social media on communication about food risk. The authors identify how journalists/media actors use social media in identifying and creating news stories arguing that food regulators need to maintain a social media presence to ensure that accurate information about food safety is disseminated via social media.

Data were collected through 105 semi-structured interviews.

While food regulators and representatives of the food industry identify advantages of social media including two-way communication and speed of transmission of information, they maintain concerns about information provided via social media fearing the potential for loss of control of the information and sensationalism. There is evidence, however, that media actors use social media to identify food stories, to find sources, gauge public opinion and to provide a human interest angle.

While there are commonalities between the three groups, concerns with social media reflect professional roles. Food regulators need to be aware of how media actors use social media and maintain a social media presence. Further, they need to monitor other sources to maintain consumer trust.

This paper adds to public debate through comparing the perspectives of the three groups of respondents each that have their own agendas which impact how they interact with and use social media.

The purpose of this paper is to report how food regulators communicate with consumers about food safety and how they believe consumers understand their role in relation to food safety. The implications of this on the role of food regulators are considered.

In total, 42 food regulators from Australia, New Zealand and the UK participated in a semi-structured interview about their response to food incidents and issues of food regulation more generally. Data were analysed thematically.

Food regulators have a key role in communicating information to consumers about food safety and food incidents. This is done in two main ways: proactive and reactive communication. The majority of regulators said that consumers do not have a good understanding of what food regulation involves and there were varied views on whether or not this is important.

Both reactive and proactive communication with consumers are important, however there are clear benefits in food regulators communicating proactively with consumers, including a greater understanding of the regulators’ role. Regulators should be supported to communicate proactively where possible.

There is a lack of information about how food regulators communicate with consumers about food safety and how food regulators perceive consumers to understand food regulation. It is this gap that forms the basis of this paper.

The purpose of this paper is to compare the perspectives of actors who contribute to trust in the food system in four high income countries which have diverse food incident histories: Australia, New Zealand (NZ), the United Kingdom (UK) and the Island of Ireland (IOI), focussing on their communication with the public, and their approach to food system interrelationships.

Data were collected in two separate studies: the first in Australia, NZ and the UK (Study 1); and the second on the IOI (Study 2). In-depth interviews were conducted with media, food industry and food regulatory actors across the four regions (n=105, Study 1; n=50, Study 2). Analysis focussed on identifying similarities and differences in the perspectives of actors from the four regions regarding the key themes of communication with the public, and relationships between media, industry and regulators.

While there were many similarities in the way food system actors from the four regions discussed (re)building trust in the context of a food incident, their perceptions differed in a number of critical ways regarding food system actor use of social media, and the attitudes and approaches towards relationships between food system actors.

This paper outlines opportunities for the regions studied to learn from each other when looking for practical strategies to maximise consumer trust in the food system, particularly relating to the use of social media and attitudes towards role definition in industry–regulator relationships.

BOOKS and Libraries for the Blind form the subject of a paper by Dr. Robert C. Moon in the May Library Journal. The writer is the son of William Moon, the inventor of the system of embossed writing bearing his name. He describes the systems of writing for the blind in use, and the various agencies for circulating literature. After examining the existing departments for the blind in Public Libraries, he comes to the conclusion that “all the libraries need more books, and if they are to reach and teach the adult blind they must have a fair proportion of them in the Moon type. All Public Libraries should possess a few works printed in the various types, care being taken to have a good supply of those embossed in the special type which is taught in the schools for the blind of the immediate locality, in order that the pupils in vacation time, and the graduates of the schools may be provided with reading matter, but the infirm and aged blind will be found in almost all communities, and for them books printed in the Moon type are indispensable. Alice S. Tyler describes the League of Library Commissions. “The success of the experiment in co‐operation which was inaugurated in 1901 by the library commissions of Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Iowa, whereby printed matter of common interest and equal necessity and value to these commissions was issued jointly, led to the suggestion that a national organization might more economically carry forward these and other lines of co‐operative work, leaving to the overcrowded state commission workers more time and money for the peculiar problems of each state.” This suggestion was brought up at the St. Louis conference, and resulted in an organization being formed under the title of the League of Library Commissions, consisting of one representative from each of the commissions included. The particular directions in which the League will promote co‐operative work are: carefully prepared lists of books for first purchase for small libraries; lists of new books which, upon examination, had been found desirable ; handbook of suggestions and direction as to the organization and management of small libraries; printed statement regarding the aims and methods of state library commissions, with comparison of their laws; definite help and suggestions on the subject of library buildings, especially floor‐plans arranged for economic administration, growing out of the experience of the library commissions in connection with the erection of Carnegie and other library buildings within the last few years; united effort to bring to the attention of book publishers the urgent need of good, durable binding, adequate indexing, &c.

This paper analyzes the connection between black political protest and mobilization, and the rise and fall of a black urban regime. The case of Oakland is instructive because by the mid-1960s the ideology of “black power” was important in mobilizing two significant elements of the historically disparaged black community: (1) supporters of the Black Panthers and, (2) neighborhood organizations concentrated in West Oakland. Additionally, Oakland like the city of Atlanta also developed a substantial black middle class that was able to mobilize along the lines of its own “racialized” class interests. Collectively, these factors were important elements in molding class-stratified “black power” and coalitional activism into the institutional politics of a black urban regime in Oakland. Ultimately, reversal factors would undermine the black urban regime in Oakland. These included changes in the race and class composition of the local population: black out-migration, the “new immigration,” increasing (predominantly white) gentrification, and the continued lack of opportunity for poor and working-class blacks, who served as the unrequited base of the black urban regime. These factors would change the fortunes of black political life in Oakland during the turbulent neoliberal era.

One would imagine that the nation of thinkers and poets—a nation enjoying the highest and best of modern elementary education—and a nation which points with pride to a province (Siebenbürger Sachsen) whose people are the best educated in the world, would have no need of such an enthusiastic advocate of the Public Library cause as Dr. Schultze. English readers unfamiliar with Germany will be surprised and puzzled at the existing state of affairs in the German library world, for it is generally believed, in Germany and England, that the “Volksbibliothek” is very much like the “Public Library,” and the number of Volksbibliotheken is large enough to confirm our belief that Germany is always trying to get ahead or to keep abreast of us. The author points to the folly of raising monuments to the memory of their great writers when their works are unknown or forgotten by the people, owing to lack of opportunity for reading them. He also calls upon the nation to have a fitting Gutenberg celebration “by making it possible for books —living witnesses of this world‐changing discovery—to be read by everyone, even in the remotest hamlet, instead of feasting, carousing, and parading with Chinese lanterns.” That the old German appetite is potent enough to hinder the progress of education and culture is evident. “As I write these lines, I am informed that a German University town which in many ways takes high rank, and which also has a large working‐class population, is going to celebrate the matriculation of the 1,000th student. The municipal authorities had previously decided to show their appreciation of the growth of the intellectual life of their town by establishing a public reading room, which had long been projected, but which all private efforts had been unable to effect. But what did the City Fathers? They thought the 1,000th student could not be welcomed in a worthier manner than by filling him with strong drink. And how much was voted for this object? 500 Mark? or even 1,000 Mark. Oh no, not at all—but thrice that amount, 3,000 Mark! (£150). The reading room remains a project—to commemorate the intellectual importance of the town!”