Harmon, Pollan, and Sibel Fitts

I really enjoyed Amy Harmon's A Race to Save the Orange by Altering Its DNA. Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) are a touchy subject that raise a lot of high emotions. This is the first article I have read that isn't involved in PR for companies that engineer GMOs, that does not entice fear in the readers. Instead, Harmon takes a fairly complicated scientific subject and makes it understood through an entrepreneur, rather than merely quoting scientists. Through her narrative, the reader is captured by Kress and his desire to save the orange trees and the jobs that they provide. Harmon's depiction of Kress enabled the reader to experience the ups and downs of his process and appreciate his conquest. While there may be downfalls to GMOs, and perhaps less invasive alternatives such as planting polycultures, I do not believe it is ethical to paint every GMO is a terrible light and overlook the potential for safe benefits from them. I believe that even though Pollan said that he "meant to highlight her article because it was a good piece", he was trying to cause uncertainty and raise alarm. Further, I think that Alexis Sobel Fitts article misses an interesting and important piece my Harmon because she mainly focuses on the negatives and continually criticizes her for not highlighting the issues surrounding Monsanto. This is a flawed argument because Kress is not working with Monsanto to develop the GMO oranges and Harmon isn't focusing on the flaws of Monsanto and their gene patents, but instead on the blight of oranges.