Words, dont come easy.

[delilah]

Some organisations, the words just flow. They deliver their message – however serious it may be - in a style that is easy on the eye. Facts, context and anecdote are interwoven to make a crystal-clear point: “whilst the problem may be complex the solution is simple, and it involves you.”
This quality of writing is common within the environmental movement. Likewise, human rights organisations. This quality is borne of the fact that the author is wholly immersed in their subject. The issues are constantly swirling around in their head, such that to sit down and express them in print is almost a physical relief. It is not so much a job, more a calling.
Once in a generation a politician fits the bill. Sir Winston Churchill, Tony Benn, Dennis Skinner. Whilst you may question the content, you can’t help but admire the style.

Some organisations, it is as if English is not their first language. Awkward, disjointed, stilted. The message is in there, but it is delivered in such a scattergun style that you have to search for it. As Eric Morecambe would have put it, they are playing all the right notes but not necessarily in the right order.
It is all the more painful when you feel an affinity with the author. You desperately want to cheer them on, safe in the knowledge that if you are getting the message then others will be too. Instead, you are left understanding exactly how your language teacher felt all those years ago as she marked your pitiful attempt at French comprehension.

Martina Navratilova had it nailed when talking about tennis: “You have to decide if you are involved or committed. Think ham and eggs. The chicken is involved, the pig is committed.”

At the end of yet another week of farmer bashing, is there anyone out there who will stand up on the national stage and show their commitment to UK agriculture?

 

[DrWazzock]

Too right.
Rightly or wrongly the effectiveness of the message has more to do with the charisma and confidence of the deliverer than the content or validity of the message itself.
In the same way, some people can close a deal purely because of who they are, rather than the merit of the deal itself.

 

[jendan]

Some organisations, the words just flow. They deliver their message – however serious it may be - in a style that is easy on the eye. Facts, context and anecdote are interwoven to make a crystal-clear point: “whilst the problem may be complex the solution is simple, and it involves you.”
This quality of writing is common within the environmental movement. Likewise, human rights organisations. This quality is borne of the fact that the author is wholly immersed in their subject. The issues are constantly swirling around in their head, such that to sit down and express them in print is almost a physical relief. It is not so much a job, more a calling.
Once in a generation a politician fits the bill. Sir Winston Churchill, Tony Benn, Dennis Skinner. Whilst you may question the content, you can’t help but admire the style.

Some organisations, it is as if English is not their first language. Awkward, disjointed, stilted. The message is in there, but it is delivered in such a scattergun style that you have to search for it. As Eric Morecambe would have put it, they are playing all the right notes but not necessarily in the right order.
It is all the more painful when you feel an affinity with the author. You desperately want to cheer them on, safe in the knowledge that if you are getting the message then others will be too. Instead, you are left understanding exactly how your language teacher felt all those years ago as she marked your pitiful attempt at French comprehension.

Martina Navratilova had it nailed when talking about tennis: “You have to decide if you are involved or committed. Think ham and eggs. The chicken is involved, the pig is committed.”

At the end of yet another week of farmer bashing, is there anyone out there who will stand up on the national stage and show their commitment to UK agriculture?

A good piece.But did you write it yourself?

 

[delilah]

A good piece.But did you write it yourself?

yep.
only just put to paper but formed it in my head over the summer, what else is there to do while topping ?

 

[jendan]

yep.
only just put to paper but formed it in my head over the summer, what else is there to do while topping ?

Well done!

 

[Treg]

I completely agree with you but.....which farmers are they suppose to support?
We all know cattle & sheep can be part of the solution to climate change & we need this pushed to the public but even here in mild Cornwall there are many Beef & Dairy herds that never see fresh grass or the sun on their backs & aren't helping the environment or the image of farming. Perhaps the farming Organisations should be promoting better farming techniques to their members,
Oh wait a minute maybe it's those farms that pay the most into the farming Organisations ?
Also why aren't farming Organisations taking on those that are backing those against us ? Or do they receive money from the same firms?

 

[Frank-the-Wool]

Some organisations, the words just flow. They deliver their message – however serious it may be - in a style that is easy on the eye. Facts, context and anecdote are interwoven to make a crystal-clear point: “whilst the problem may be complex the solution is simple, and it involves you.”
This quality of writing is common within the environmental movement. Likewise, human rights organisations. This quality is borne of the fact that the author is wholly immersed in their subject. The issues are constantly swirling around in their head, such that to sit down and express them in print is almost a physical relief. It is not so much a job, more a calling.
Once in a generation a politician fits the bill. Sir Winston Churchill, Tony Benn, Dennis Skinner. Whilst you may question the content, you can’t help but admire the style.

Some organisations, it is as if English is not their first language. Awkward, disjointed, stilted. The message is in there, but it is delivered in such a scattergun style that you have to search for it. As Eric Morecambe would have put it, they are playing all the right notes but not necessarily in the right order.
It is all the more painful when you feel an affinity with the author. You desperately want to cheer them on, safe in the knowledge that if you are getting the message then others will be too. Instead, you are left understanding exactly how your language teacher felt all those years ago as she marked your pitiful attempt at French comprehension.

Martina Navratilova had it nailed when talking about tennis: “You have to decide if you are involved or committed. Think ham and eggs. The chicken is involved, the pig is committed.”

At the end of yet another week of farmer bashing, is there anyone out there who will stand up on the national stage and show their commitment to UK agriculture?

Well yes there are a lot of people out there who stand up in any way possible to get our message out. The NFU do a fantastic job with the media coverage and many ordinary members do whatever they can.
I spent a few hours yesterday with CBS filming and explaining Brexit to Americans who have not a clue about what it means, this was organised through the NFU..
I do regular pieces on local Radio normally contacted direct by them. In the course of a year I would guess we are involved in up to 10 TV (local) issues from closure of abattoirs to Brexit and climate change.

It is extremely difficult to get the good news story out about Agriculture but there are many of us who try.
The NFU media team are now very focused and whether it be the effects of a no deal, Tesco using children to slag us off or writing to your MP about E10, fuel it is doing the best it can.

There have been some great Orators in our leaders but things have changed and now it is images and Social Media that have the greater influence.

 

[ISCO]

Whilst I agree the social.media message is vital I do believe the industry does need a passionate, media friendly, well spoken person with a sound understanding of the science to represent the industry on tv and in debates.

The person who has defended agriculture the most in this last year on tv is Piers Morgan. Love him or loathe him he takes Packham et al to task.

All too often NFU put forward a group secretary and a local farmer who do their best but do not get the facts that are important to the public across in a manner that has impact.

I believe NFU/AHDB etc. should jointly fund such a person/people. AHDB 's focus on knowledge exchange, whilst worthwhile, is of secondary importance to countering all of the negative publicity we are exposed to at the moment.
I hope industry bodies are preparing for the onslaught which will be directed at us in January (Veganuary) which i expect to be worse than usual as these groups currently have the bit between their teeth.

 

[CornishRanger]

Maybe we are just late to the party? The foundations of the current farmer bashing have been laid over the last couple decades, maybe it could be argued that as an industry we underestimated the damage that bad publicity would cause in the long run, and this didn't help as a wedge was driven between the rural community and general urban public.
With a biased in the media depicting country people and farmers as fox hunting, badger decimating, spraying off all wildlife and receiving massive subsidies, unfortunately anything we say would carry no weight.
In modern society celebrity status seems to add more weight to your opinion than qualification and real experience in the subject.

 

[Danllan]

Whilst I agree the social.media message is vital I do believe the industry does need a passionate, media friendly, well spoken person with a sound understanding of the science to represent the industry on tv and in debates.

The person who has defended agriculture the most in this last year on tv is Piers Morgan. Love him or loathe him he takes Packham et al to task.

All too often NFU put forward a group secretary and a local farmer who do their best but do not get the facts that are important to the public across in a manner that has impact.

I believe NFU/AHDB etc. should jointly fund such a person/people. AHDB 's focus on knowledge exchange, whilst worthwhile, is of secondary importance to countering all of the negative publicity we are exposed to at the moment.
I hope industry bodies are preparing for the onslaught which will be directed at us in January (Veganuary) which i expect to be worse than usual as these groups currently have the bit between their teeth.

There should be someone selected on ability, not electability, which is why the organisational spokesmen rarely do a good job. The spokesman should obviously know his stuff but, just as importantly, have a strong enough personality to allow him to overcome the current media fashion of the 'interviewer' continually interrupting a response and / or changing the subject. He also has to be likeable and with genuine humour. It certainly is a rare mix, but there are people with it.

 

[The Seeker]

Im really looking forward to clarksons new program on farming. I think he's a real person who's sick of all the 21st century cobblers. if his new program is a flop then there must be sorting sadly wrong with british agriculture.

 

[ISCO]

There should be someone selected on ability, not electability, which is why the organisational spokesmen rarely do a good job. The spokesman should obviously know his stuff but, just as importantly, have a strong enough personality to allow him to overcome the current media fashion of the 'interviewer' continually interrupting a response and / or changing the subject. He also has to be likeable and with genuine humour. It certainly is a rare mix, but there are people with it.

Exactly.
These people are there you just need to pay top money to get them. In the circumstances we have now we desperately need such a person.

 

[Hfd Cattle]

Im really looking forward to clarksons new program on farming. I think he's a real person who's sick of all the 21st century cobblers. if his new program is a flop then there must be sorting sadly wrong with british agriculture.

Love him or loathe him I think Farming have to embrace what he is doing as he does have a massive influence in society. My worry is that the 'clever boys' who always know better will destroy his programme by criticism of what he does and says but we must look at the bigger picture and be thankful he is for us and not against us!

 

[Pond digger]

Some organisations, the words just flow. They deliver their message – however serious it may be - in a style that is easy on the eye. Facts, context and anecdote are interwoven to make a crystal-clear point: “whilst the problem may be complex the solution is simple, and it involves you.”
This quality of writing is common within the environmental movement. Likewise, human rights organisations. This quality is borne of the fact that the author is wholly immersed in their subject. The issues are constantly swirling around in their head, such that to sit down and express them in print is almost a physical relief. It is not so much a job, more a calling.
Once in a generation a politician fits the bill. Sir Winston Churchill, Tony Benn, Dennis Skinner. Whilst you may question the content, you can’t help but admire the style.

Some organisations, it is as if English is not their first language. Awkward, disjointed, stilted. The message is in there, but it is delivered in such a scattergun style that you have to search for it. As Eric Morecambe would have put it, they are playing all the right notes but not necessarily in the right order.
It is all the more painful when you feel an affinity with the author. You desperately want to cheer them on, safe in the knowledge that if you are getting the message then others will be too. Instead, you are left understanding exactly how your language teacher felt all those years ago as she marked your pitiful attempt at French comprehension.

Martina Navratilova had it nailed when talking about tennis: “You have to decide if you are involved or committed. Think ham and eggs. The chicken is involved, the pig is committed.”

At the end of yet another week of farmer bashing, is there anyone out there who will stand up on the national stage and show their commitment to UK agriculture?

I think that’s very well written; perhaps you should have a go yourself .

 

[delilah]

I completely agree with you but.....which farmers are they suppose to support?

Britain's farmers. All of them.

There is only one environmentally benign diet.
It isn't a vegetarian diet.
it isn't a vegan diet.
It isn't a flexitarian diet.
It is a local diet.

We have two trump cards to play in hammering that message home:
1) fossil fuel use - the real cause of climate change - in the clocking up of food miles.
2) carbon sequestration by grassland, at which the UK excels.

Do AR concern themselves with the flaws in their argument ? No, they just keep shouting it until everyone believes them: Go vegan to save the planet.
We cannot fanny about debating pasture fed/ housed/intensive blah blah. We just need to start delivering a clear message: Eat British to save the planet.

It isn't too late. With the general public's growing concern for the environment it is an open goal. The problem is we are asking people to deliver the message for whom it is a job, not a calling. They are involved. but not committed.

 

[Danllan]

Of course you all must know we do have one trump card in this, the other side's argument is b*llocks.

That isn't just a bit of flippancy, it really is true. Quite apart from reasons outlined already, and very well by @delilah just above this post, the public instinctively know that a mixed diet is best for their health and that a 'local' diet is best for the planet.

It's a fact that if you shout something loud enough and for long enough, some will start to accept it; but give them simple facts, truths, iterated as often as necessary, and the vegan etc. propaganda will fall by the wayside after being seen for what it is.

 

[yellowbelly]

As @Pond digger says, @delilah 's posts on here are always well thought out and written and would get my support if he (she?? ) thinks he would have the time and inclination to tackle the task.

There is a bloke in our part of the world who finds public speaking comes easy to him. He's an agronomist by trade but is an excellent after dinner speaker and a 'farming evangelist'. He already waves the flag for us, above and beyond the call of duty, and I expect he could be the sort of fellow @delilah has in mind.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/867795359145353216

 

[Agrivator]

Britain's farmers. All of them.

There is only one environmentally benign diet.
It isn't a vegetarian diet.
it isn't a vegan diet.
It isn't a flexitarian diet.
It is a local diet.

We have two trump cards to play in hammering that message home:
1) fossil fuel use - the real cause of climate change - in the clocking up of food miles.
2) carbon sequestration by grassland, at which the UK excels.

Do AR concern themselves with the flaws in their argument ? No, they just keep shouting it until everyone believes them: Go vegan to save the planet.
We cannot fanny about debating pasture fed/ housed/intensive blah blah. We just need to start delivering a clear message: Eat British to save the planet.

It isn't too late. With the general public's growing concern for the environment it is an open goal. The problem is we are asking people to deliver the message for whom it is a job, not a calling. They are involved. but not committed.

We need to coin a term to replace ''carbon sequestration''. Something which the general public can understand such as ''carbon lockup'' or ''carbon capture''.

Many folk will associate 'sequestration' with having their furniture seized by the bailiffs.

 

[texelburger]

Whilst I agree the social.media message is vital I do believe the industry does need a passionate, media friendly, well spoken person with a sound understanding of the science to represent the industry on tv and in debates.

The person who has defended agriculture the most in this last year on tv is Piers Morgan. Love him or loathe him he takes Packham et al to task.

All too often NFU put forward a group secretary and a local farmer who do their best but do not get the facts that are important to the public across in a manner that has impact.

I believe NFU/AHDB etc. should jointly fund such a person/people. AHDB 's focus on knowledge exchange, whilst worthwhile, is of secondary importance to countering all of the negative publicity we are exposed to at the moment.
I hope industry bodies are preparing for the onslaught which will be directed at us in January (Veganuary) which i expect to be worse than usual as these groups currently have the bit between their teeth.

What you say is very similar to what a city spin doctor told me years ago.He said the NFU should not put up members for debate against someone who is media savvy as there's likely to only be one winner.The NFU should employ slick media guys for these situations.

 

[vantage]

As @Pond digger says, @delilah 's posts on here are always well thought out and written and would get my support if he (she?? ) thinks he would have the time and inclination to tackle the task.

There is a bloke in our part of the world who finds public speaking comes easy to him. He's an agronomist by trade but is an excellent after dinner speaker and a 'farming evangelist'. He already waves the flag for us, above and beyond the call of duty, and I expect he could be the sort of fellow @delilah has in mind.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/867795359145353216

Well said, with a nice bit of birdsong in the background!