We’ve heard about the benefits of genetically modified crops to consumers in developing countries. We’re also aware of the ubiquity of GMOs in the American food supply, and we’re familiar with the anti-corporate and environmentalist arguments against them. Above all, we are well acquainted with the debate on GMO labeling—all news sources highlight US consumers’ great mistrust of GM crops. A recent Wall Street Journal article explained that consumers are so wary of GMOs that producers will pay to label their goods “GMO free,” even when their products – like salt – contain no genes to modify at all. This stigma, contradictory to the scientific opinion that GM crops are safe to consume, has fueled the controversy surrounding GMOs, and has stifled potential innovation. While we’ve heard about Golden Rice and increased cotton yields in India, we’ve heard little about GM products aimed toward US consumer tastes. Such technologies, like the non-browning Arctic Apple and carcinogen-free Innate Potato, would provide direct gains to US consumers and could potentially shift opinion on GM crops.

For my beat, I will highlight stories like these – exposing the “underside” of GMOs. I will synthesize GMO research from a nuanced perspective, bringing to the public’s attention potential uses for and issues with the technology. Are farmers in the US following proper protocol to keep environmental problems surrounding GMOs at bay? Could GMOs be used to grow more food in the face of drought in California? Lesser explored questions like these are crucial to problems facing our future food supply, and providing consumers with balanced information is our best strategy for finding solutions.