December 2017 // Volume 55 // Number 6 // Research In Brief // v55-6rb3
New Extension Approaches to Serving Agricultural Media in Advancing Farm-Life Safety Communications
The study described here focused on needs and opportunities for Extension to serve agricultural media more fully in addressing new safety risks in agriculture, one of the nation's most hazardous industries. The study was conducted in the context of major broadening of channels used by agricultural media. A mixed-methods approach included a national survey to identify views and suggestions from agricultural journalists about covering farm-life safety. A companion literature review addressed case studies and other research featuring Extension collaborations with media for advancing farm-life safety. Findings revealed expanding opportunities and ideas for Extension personnel, with implications for Extension program areas beyond farm-life safety.
Safety aspects of farming and ranching fit within a long history of channeling Extension information through agricultural and general media (Everly, 1971; Graham, 1927; Knox, 1961; Lockard et al., 2010; O'Neill, 1987; Oskam, 1992; Schwab, Miller, Shutske, & Ohmans, 2005; Wilson, 1963). Safety information continues to invite priority for Extension as agriculture remains one of the nation's most hazardous industries (Agricultural Safety and Health Council of America [ASHCA], 2015). Farming and ranching activities create an agricultural work death rate eight times higher than the all-industry average (Murphy & Lee, 2009). In 2014, the occupational injury cost in U.S. agriculture was $8.3 billion in medical costs and lost productivity, with a typical cost of $1 million for one tractor overturn (ASHCA, 2015). With regard to human cost, every 3.5 days a child dies in an agriculture-related incident (National Children's Center for Rural and Agricultural Health and Safety, 2014).
The research reported here is based on major structural and operational changes in both agriculture and agricultural media. These changes affect needs and opportunities for Extension to involve agricultural media more fully and effectively in farm-life safety.
Changes in Agriculture
Recent changes in agriculture pose new challenges for maintaining safe agricultural working environments. For example, larger machinery, equipment, storage facilities, and livestock confinement systems increase risks of vehicle rollovers, falls, grain bin suffocation, zoonotic infections, and respiratory hazards (Rabinowitz et al., 2013; U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 2017). More small-scale niche farming options, such as specialty produce, direct marketing, heritage breeds, local wineries, and agritourism, pose a wide variety of safety challenges. A broadening, multicultural workforce raises language issues and features families new to farming (many with children) who need safety information (Byler, Kiernan, Steel, Neiner, & Murphy, 2013; Irwin & Poots, 2015; Liebman, Juarez-Carillo, Reyes, & Keifer, 2014).
Changes in Agricultural Media
Agricultural periodicals have become increasingly specialized due to changes rooted in farm demographics, advertiser preferences, and other forces (Evans & Salcedo, 1974). New farm radio and television program services have emerged, often as program networks serving smaller stations. Computers, websites, online search systems, mobile phones, thousands of software applications, and newer information developments have created new media channels.
Even so-called traditional media, such as agricultural magazines, radio, and television, are increasingly becoming multimedia platforms. A 2015 national Millennium Research survey revealed that about 20% of farmers/ranchers listen to farm broadcasts on a medium other than radio (streaming video/audio, podcasts, web videos, etc.) (National Association of Farm Broadcasting, 2015). A 2013 national survey indicated that 39% of agri-marketer respondents expected digital media to comprise 20%–50% of their advertising, marketing, and public relations budgets by 2017 (Truffle Media Networks, 2013). Simultaneously, traditional agricultural media, such as farm periodicals and rural radio and television broadcasts, continue to be major sources of information for farm and ranch families. Examples of recent findings on farmer information sources are presented in Table 1.
|2014||Readex Research national farmer surveya||81% of respondents reported reading agriculture magazines and farm papers weekly|
|2015||Millennium Research nationwide survey of farmers and ranchersb||77% of respondents reported listening to farm news, weather, markets, and agricultural information on the radio|
|2014||Ipsos Marketing, Agriculture and Animal Health national farmer surveyc||84% of respondents considered farm broadcasting "extremely important" or "somewhat important" in their daily decisions and operational management|
|2013||Survey of farmers in east-central Iowad||Farmers indicated that newspaper and magazine articles were their most commonly used sources of agricultural safety and health information; 77% reported using them at least monthly|
|aAgri Media Council of American Business Media. (2014). 2014 media channel study. Retrieved from http://www.siia.net/Portals/0/pdf/ABM/TobeDistributed%20-%20AgriMediaCouncil2014Reportv2.pdf
bNational Association of Farm Broadcasting. (2015). Farm Radio connects: Wave 1 to 3 research. Retrieved from https://nafb.com/sites/default/files/blogs/Marketing%20and%20Research/Farm%20Radio%20Connects_72nd%20Convention.pdf
cNational Association of Farm Broadcasting. (September 2014). 2014 Media Usage Study. Retrieved from https://nafb.com/sites/default/files/pages/1202/nafbmedia-usagerelease.pdf
d Chiu, S., Cheyney, M., Ramirez, M., & Gerr, F. (2015). Where do agricultural producers get safety and health information? Journal of Agromedicine, 20(3), 265–272.
Research Objective and Questions
The aforementioned substantial changes prompted a fresh look at new opportunities for Extension to involve agricultural media more fully and effectively in farm-life safety. Four research questions guided that effort:
- What interests and attitudes do agricultural journalists hold in terms of covering safety of farm and ranch families and their communities?
- What safety information sources and what media platforms are agricultural journalists using?
- What kinds of safety information do agricultural journalists invite from Extension?
- What new potentials exist for enhancing Extension/media collaborations regarding farm-life safety?
The research project described here, which was sponsored by the Upper Midwest Agricultural Safety and Health Center, was approved by the Institutional Review Board, University of Illinois (IRB Protocol Number 14166). A mixed-methods design comprised two methods for gathering quantitative and qualitative data. One method involved an online survey of professional agricultural journalists. The other involved an analysis of recent research about Extension relations with agricultural media regarding farm-life safety.
Serving as the population for the online survey were 150 agricultural journalist members of the American Agricultural Editors' Association (AAEA). They were editors, writers, and photojournalists employed by, or freelancing for, general and specialized agricultural periodicals in the United States and Canada. Representing editorial departments of top-circulation agricultural periodicals and media organizations, AAEA is one of the nation's largest agricultural journalist organizations.
An online survey was conducted through REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture), a secure web-based electronic data capture tool for conducting research. A 17-question instrument included Likert-scale and check-all-that-apply response formats, plus demographic items and opportunities for open responses. Selection of topics and terminology was guided by a literature review of farm safety communications and content review of agricultural periodicals. Additionally, an informal face-to-face pretest of items by 25 journalists and media professionals was implemented.
The survey instrument was delivered via email to the journalists, with two reminders sent during the 3-week response period. No follow-up sampling was conducted among nonrespondents. Completed questionnaires were returned by 41 respondents, for a 27% response rate. Gender profiles of respondents and the survey population were identical (56% male, 44% female). No baseline data were available to compare the agricultural reporting experience of respondents (71% had 20 years or more of experience) with those of the survey population.
The companion review of quantitative and qualitative research literature involved analysis of 168 articles and case reports about communications related to farm safety. The literature included articles in scholarly journals, research news in trade journals, project reports from organizations, and other formats. The literature derived from a variety of organizational settings, including Extension (13%).
Research Question 1. What Interests and Attitudes Do Agricultural Journalists Hold in Terms of Covering Safety of Farm and Ranch Families and Their Communities?
Findings suggested that respondents considered agricultural occupational safety as very important (Table 2).
|Level of importance||No. of respondents||% of respondents|
Three fourths (30/41) of the respondents reported that they and/or their family members had experienced serious farm injuries. Such personal connections to trauma could explain why 93% of respondents expressed interest in covering agricultural safety (Table 3).
|Level of interest||No. of respondents||% of respondents|
More than 80% of respondents reported believing that farm magazines and farm papers do an adequate or somewhat adequate job of covering safety and injuries. They gave a similar positive assessment of their own coverage of such topics (Table 4).
|Level of adequacy||Occupational safety
|Journalist rating of own reporting
|Adequate||12 (29)||9 (22)||13 (32)|
|Somewhat adequate||22 (54)||23 (56)||17 (41)|
|Neutral||3 (7)||3 (7)||5 (12)|
|Somewhat inadequate||3 (7)||5 (12)||5 (12)|
|Inadequate||1 (2)||1 (2)||1 (2)|
More than 80% of respondents said available safety information is adequate or somewhat adequate for covering and understanding farm safety (Table 5). However, several comments challenged safety advocates to do a better job. For example, one respondent said, "Safety information seems to come out once a year for farm safety week and then goes silent."
|Level of adequacy||No. of respondents||% of respondents|
Research Question 2. What Safety Information Sources and What New Media Platforms Are Agricultural Journalists Using?
Survey results indicated that the participating journalists looked first to university Extension specialists and farm safety organizations for safety information (Table 6). Additional sources mentioned included farmers who experienced injuries, insurance company representatives, and companies that received good safety ratings.
|Source||No. of respondents||% of respondents|
|Farm safety organizations||32||78|
|U.S. Department of Agriculture/other federal, state agencies||23||56|
|Journalists in other media||5||12|
Table 7 reveals a heavy and varied use of social media by journalists in disseminating information.
|Skill, social media tool||No. of respondents||% of respondents|
|Long-form sharing (Facebook, Google+)||31||76|
|Video sharing (YouTube, Blip)||23||56|
|Long-form blogging (WordPress)||19||46|
|Photo sharing (Pinterest, Flickr)||19||46|
|Audio sharing (Vocaroo, Sound Cloud)||4||10|
Research Question 3. What Kinds of Safety Information Do Agricultural Journalists Invite from Extension?
Although 68% of respondents answered that education/prevention articles are most appropriate for reporting on safety (Table 8), their comments strongly indicated that traumatic incident articles are most effective in telling the safety story. The statement "Attention spans are typically more attuned following a real incident" reflected a common sentiment.
|Type of article||No. of respondents||% of respondents|
|Follow-up to accident||1||2|
According to the survey, the most useful types of information are agricultural injury statistics and safety expert contact information (Table 9). In the absence of comprehensive national data, methods for collecting information about agricultural fatalities have been suggested (Seltzer, Murphy, & Yesalis, 1990). Contact lists of safety experts already exist or can be compiled.
|Type of information||No. of respondents||% of respondents|
|Statistics on agricultural injury||38||93|
|Contact lists of safety experts||35||85|
|Email alerts for safety-related articles||26||63|
|Public service ads||8||20|
Research Question 4. What New Potentials Exist for Enhancing Extension/Media Collaboration Regarding Farm-Life Safety?
Six areas of opportunity for Extension information emerged from the survey results and the related review of literature.
- Findings call for a broadened view of the role of agricultural media as channels for Extension information serving farm and ranch families. The survey confirmed that print publishers of the past now offer social media platforms as well as traditional publications. The literature review revealed the use of other platforms, such as websites, mobile communications, farm radio and television programming, seminars, trade shows, and direct mail services. In new ways these channels can help multiply the safety outreach efforts of Extension. This broadened approach is consistent with a trend toward more comprehensive approaches in promoting safe behaviors (Beaudin, Jacoby, & Quick, 1997; Gharis, Bardon, Evans, Hubbard, & Taylor, 2014; Upper Midwest Agricultural Safety and Health Center, 2016).
- Extension can be encouraged by respondents' expressed interest in safety information focused on prevention. This interest dovetails with results of prevention-oriented case studies documenting successful collaborations between agricultural media and Extension personnel. Other suggestions reported in the literature involved helping agricultural media cover and take part in safety activities such as day camps and training workshops (Hartling, Brison, Crumley, Klassen, & Pickett, 2004). Considerable research emphasized the value of partnerships in breaking down silos of effort (Bradley, Driscoll, & Bardon, 2012; Burgus, Schwab, & Shelley, 2012; Murphy & Lee, 2009; Ozegovic & Voaklander, 2011; Palermo & Ehlers, 2002; Richter, Hall, & Deere, 2007; Stone, 2006; Typhina, Bardon, & Gharis, 2015).
- Survey findings identified special potential for agricultural media to use Extension information suited to social media such as long-form sharing, microblogging and long-form blogging, and video and photo sharing.
- The survey and literature review revealed several kinds of farm safety information that would be of value: (a) more timely statistics about safety incidents and fatalities, (b) contact lists that would help journalists gain access to safety experts, and (c) case examples illustrating how safe work habits and other preventive activities have averted tragedies (Reed, Claunch, & Haurylko, 2008; Rein, 1990).
- Three fourths of the survey respondents said they considered farm safety regulations to be "least effective" in creating a safe work environment. However, the literature review identified a need for more information agricultural media can use to report on existing, new, and proposed regulations.
- Related literature also indicated a need for enhanced information in two other arenas: (a) new and emerging safety issues in agriculture, such as those stemming from precision farming, unmanned aerial systems, health in livestock confinement facilities, and increasingly larger and more complex equipment and operations, and (b) safety and health of special audiences, such as farmworkers, minorities, and children (Webster, Rogers, & Mariger, 2001; Wright, Marlenga, Lee, & Jepsen, 2013).
Results of the study described here revealed encouraging signs of potential for Extension professionals to collaborate more fully with agricultural media regarding farm-life safety, and to mutual advantage. Media respondents expressed active interest in covering safety more effectively and offered suggestions that Extension may be in good position to act on. Their reported desire to emphasize preventive information may lead to greater media participation in farm-life safety efforts.
The findings also have implications well beyond the safety focus of the analysis reported here. Potentials for enhanced relations with agricultural media extend across other Extension program areas.
Several limitations should be noted in terms of scope and methodology for the research project. Discussion of changes in agriculture and the media serving agriculture is illustrative rather than comprehensive. Survey findings come from agricultural writers, editors, and photographers who are members of one of the nation's largest agricultural journalist organizations, AAEA. However, findings do not represent others, such as agricultural reporters with general news media, agricultural radio and television broadcasters, or many of the agricultural journalists associated with livestock breed periodicals. Also, the extent to which responses were representative of all agricultural journalists in AAEA remains uncertain, especially less-experienced journalists.
Results of the analysis revealed promising research possibilities. Further research can involve feedback from a broader base of agricultural journalists. Researchers can dig more deeply into changes within agriculture and agricultural media to identify safety-related topics and audiences Extension can address. The findings suggest potential for experiments that can identify and track approaches for new Extension and media partnerships. Further research involving farm-life safety can identify the information needs and sources of personnel within the expanding niche farming enterprises. Additionally, researchers can gather communications-guiding information from special at-risk audiences such as children and migrant workers.
Agricultural Safety and Health Council of America. (2015). ASHCA facts 2015. Retrieved from http://ashca.org/agriculture-industry-group-releases-2015-safety-fact-sheet
Beaudin, B. P., Jacoby, L., & Quick, D. (1997). Promoting safe behavior: Theoretical foundations. Professional Safety, 42(4), 29–32.
Bradley, L., Driscoll, E., & Bardon, R. (2012). Removing the tension from Extension. Journal of Extension, 50(2), Article 2TOT1. Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2012april/tt1p.shtml
Burgus, S., Schwab, C., & Shelley, M. (2012). Assessing rural coalitions that address safety and health issues. Journal of Extension, 50(2), Article 2FEA7. Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2012april/a7.php
Byler, L., Kiernan, N. E., Steel, S., Neiner, P., & Murphy, D. J. (2013). Beginning farmers: Will they face up to safety and health hazards? Journal of Extension, 51(6), Article 6FEA10. Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2013december/a10.php
Evans, J., & Salcedo, R. (1974). Communications in agriculture: The American farm press. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press.
Everly, J. (1971). Mass media in Extension: A review of recent literature. Journal of Applied Communications, 54(3), 25–37.
Gharis, L. W., Bardon, R. E., Evans, J. L., Hubbard, W. G., & Taylor, E. (2014). Expanding the reach of Extension through social media. Journal of Extension, 52(3), Article 3FEA3. Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2014june/a3.php
Graham, A. (1927). Evolution of extension news. Industrial Journalism Series VIII, Kansas State Agricultural College Bulletin, 11(8).
Hartling, L., Brison, R., Crumley, E., Klassen, T., & Pickett, W. (2004). A systematic review of interventions to prevent childhood farm injuries. Pediatrics, 114(4), e483–e497.
Irwin, A., & Poots, J. (2015). The human factor in agriculture: An interview study to identify farmers' non-technical skills. Safety Science, 74, 114–121.
Knox, J. (1961). Relative value of mass media in Extension. Master's thesis. Fort Collins, CO: Colorado State University.
Liebman, A., Juarez-Carillo, P., Reyes, I., & Keifer, M. (2014). A model health and safety intervention for Hispanic immigrants working in the dairy industry. Journal of Agromedicine, 19(2), 78–82.
Lockard, M., Petty, B., Peutz, J., Spencer, M., Lanting, R., & Shaklee, H. (2010). Working smart: Increasing the reach of Extension programming through media advertising. Journal of Extension, 48(1), Article 1TOT2. Available at: https://www.joe.org/joe/2010february/tt2.php
Murphy, D. J., & Lee, B. C. (2009). Critical issues facing agricultural safety and health. Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health, 15(3), 203–205.
National Association of Farm Broadcasting. (2015). Farm Radio connects: Wave 1 to 3 research. Retrieved from https://nafb.com/sites/default/files/blogs/Marketing%20and%20Research/Farm%20Radio%20Connects_72nd%20Convention.pdf
National Children's Center for Rural and Agricultural Safety and Health. (2014). Fact sheet: Childhood agricultural injuries in the U.S. Marshfield, WI. Retrieved from http://www3.marshfieldclinic.org/proxy/MCRF-Centers-NFMC-NCCRAHS-2014_child_ag_injury_factsheet.1.pdf
O'Neill, B. (1987). Extension makes the news. Journal of Extension, 25(3), Article 3IAW2. Available at: https://www.joe.org/joe/1987fall/iw2.php
Oskam, J. (1992). Fields of danger: Communicating agricultural safety and health. Journal of Applied Communications, 76(2), 1–8.
Ozegovic, D., & Voaklander, D. C. (2011). What we are not talking about: An evaluation of prevention messaging in print media reporting on agricultural injuries and fatalities. American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 54(8), 603–608.
Palermo, T., & Ehlers, J. (2002). Coalitions: Partnerships to promote agricultural health and safety. Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health, 8(2), 161–174.
Rabinowitz, P., Fowler, H., Odofin, L., Messinger, C., Sparer, J., & Vegso, S. (2013). Swine worker awareness and behavior regarding prevention of zoonotic influenza transmission. Journal of Agromedicine, 18, 304–311.
Reed, D. B., Claunch, D. T., & Haurylko, C. J. (2008). Farm safety through the camera's eye. Journal of Agricultural Safety & Health, 14(3), 321–332.
Rein, B. K. (1990). Guide to communicating farm safety for editors, illustrators, cinematographers, and photographers. Farm Safety Fact Sheet 0-860-527, Extension Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC.
Richter, J. S., Hall, B. C., & Deere, G. D. (2007). Initiation of farm safety programs in the Arkansas Delta: A case study of participatory methods. Journal of Rural Health, 23(1), 89–91.
Schwab, C., Miller, L., Shutske, J., & Ohmans, P. (2005). Signs of safety in agriculture. Washington, DC: Farm Safety Program, CSREES, U.S. Department of Agriculture. Retrieved from http://nasdonline.org
Seltzer, B. L., Murphy, D. J., & Yesalis, C. E. (1990). A methodology for the collection of supplemental information on agricultural fatalities. American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 18(2), 201–209.
Stone, K. (May 9, 2006). Promoting farm safety awareness. Knight Ridder Tribune Business News, Washington, DC, 1.
Truffle Media Networks. (2013). Ag media's future: How can we listen, connect, engage? Truffle Media Networks, Indianapolis, IN.
Typhina, E., Bardon, R. E., & Gharis, L. W. (2015). Collaborating with your clients using social media and mobile communications. Journal of Extension, 53(1), Article 1TOT2. Available at: http://.www.joe.org/joe/2015february/tt2.php
Upper Midwest Agricultural Safety and Health Center. (2016). UMASH highlights of 2015. Retrieved from http://umash.umn.edu/umash-connection-newsletter/
U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration. (2017). Agricultural operations: Hazards & controls. Retrieved from https://www.osha.gov/dsg/topics/agriculturaloperations/hazards_controls.html
Webster, J., Rogers, D., & Mariger, S. (2001). Utah Extension educators' perceived satisfaction with and needs for agricultural health and safety information. Journal of Extension, 39(2), Article 2RIB3. Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2001april/RB3.php
Wilson, R. (1963). Rural families and the mass media. Journal of Extension, 1(1). Available at: https://www.joe.org/joe/1963spring/1963-1-a7.pdf
Wright, S., Marlenga, B., Lee, B. C., & Jepsen, D. (2013). Childhood agricultural injuries: An update for clinicians. Current Problems in Pediatric and Adolescent Health Care, 43, 20–44.