Skip to main content

A potential rebranding could shift the debate around Monsanto’s core product: genetically modified seeds.

Brendan McDermid/Reuters

Hundreds of protesters made their way through the streets of downtown Toronto in May of this year, waving giant "No GMO" and "Stop Mon-Satan" signs – just one of dozens of protests against Monsanto Co. around the world that day. The signs they carried exemplified the U.S.-based seed giant's reputation as a villain, blamed for everything from poisoning the food supply to killing off bee populations to impoverishing farmers.

In its century-long existence, the company based in St. Louis, Mo., has evolved into one of the world's most-hated companies, and a lightning rod for controversy. But, according to experts, that could all change with a possible Bayer-Monsanto deal.

The first step could be losing the name – and the baggage along with it.

Story continues below advertisement

Read more: Bayer clinches Monsanto takeover

"I do think that, strategically, many have come to the conclusion that the brand needs to be reshifted, or, I guess, eliminated from the marketplace," said Sylvain Charlebois, dean of management at Dalhousie University. He and others predicted that, along with the merger, the brand "Monsanto" would disappear altogether. "There's just so much hatred," he said.

In recent decades, environmentalists and food activists have set their targets squarely on Monsanto. Among other grievances, they've pointed to Monsanto's litigious approach in enforcing patents, and aggressive practices in dealing with farmers. They've also pointed to Monsanto's role in manufacturing products such as Agent Orange and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCBs), which has been linked with increased incidences of cancer.

The company's approach in addressing these controversies, meanwhile, has fallen flat. "They were, by their own admission, terrible at public relations and risk communication about their products," said John Lang, a sociology professor at Occidental College in California.

"They were very aggressive, and [in effect] really said, 'This is science, and if you don't understand science, you're not smart and that's a problem.' That's not a strategy that goes well."

Bayer, he said, has a better track record of dealing with the public and selling consumer products. The company also represents a trickier target for activists, because of its diverse range of products – including popular consumer brands such as Aspirin.

"The environmentalists will need to figure out ways to come up with a new foe," Dr. Charlebois said.

Story continues below advertisement

Most of all, a potential rebranding could shift the debate around Monsanto's core product: genetically modified seeds. For much of the public, the company name is synonymous with GMOs, and a distraction for scientists who try to espouse the benefits of genetically modified organisms.

A variety of Monsanto-branded genetically modified products, including soybeans, corn and canola, has long been approved as safe for human consumption by Health Canada.

"It shifts the terms," said Dr. Lang, who recently published a book on the history of genetically modified foods. "It will basically give [Bayer] an opportunity to reframe the GMO debate on their own terms … and allow them to speak from a place where people are willing to give them the benefit of the doubt."

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Comments

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • All comments will be reviewed by one or more moderators before being posted to the site. This should only take a few moments.
  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed. Commenters who repeatedly violate community guidelines may be suspended, causing them to temporarily lose their ability to engage with comments.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.
Cannabis pro newsletter