“Sir, I am afraid for my life and future, afraid because March Against Monsanto has threatened me and my community,” Navid Rakotofala told me amidst a fury of reactions to his unconventional expose prank to explore just how outrageously far “mainstream” anti-GMO activists would go to to spread their message.
Navid is my protege at the University of Toliara in the southwest of Madagascar. He doesn’t attend the university but he has assisted me as a volunteer to translate my courses for over a year now. In exchange, I’ve helped him improve his English by teaching him about the growing field of psychology of science (POS); that is, how our brains create and relate to this thing we call science. There’s no better way to teach POS than to contrast unhealthy and healthy scientific discourse. In my personal opinion, there are few examples of unhealthy science discourse more clear than the extreme vocalists of the anti-biotechnology movement.
Well, Navid took my message to heart, and despite my concerns, he created quite the prank to coincide with the May 30 March Against Monsanto to challenge the way the group’s supporters engage this issue. They often seem more interested in promoting their views regardless of whether the science is behind them or whether people will actually be helped by what they are advocating. He set up an intriguing hoax to evaluate their sincerity. The fall out from this teen’s hijinx are extremely telling, and should serve as a clarion call to those open to reconsidering their scientific and ethical positions on genetic engineering. Navid’s project speaks for itself, let me just share some highlights from how this extremist group responded.
Madagascar is not much involved in this debate. We don’t have any approved genetically modified crops but our impoverished country might benefit greatly if Golden Rice or other enhanced GMO products were approved. For the most part, we are observers to what seems like a loud and often silly debate about GM safety. In the days before the global event, Navid set up a fake blogspot, a fictitious Madagascar branch of the March Against Monsanto.
Navid begins his prank
Over the following days, he started posting anti-GMO and anti-Monsanto manifestoes. Here are his outrageous posts that he put up in the days before the March. Click on a tile to view full-size.
Navid then started posting pictures of his friends whom he had given anti-GMO signs, each more outrageous then the next. “I made the signs and gave them to my friends to see what your group would say,” he would later write to the March Against Monsanto leaders. Click on each tile to view full-size.
Finally, the big day arrived and Navid detailed the fictitious Madagascar March Against Monsanto in lurid detail, making sure to hit all the inflammatory notes that anti-GMO activists strike on their websites.
Navid would later write: “My teacher (who does not agree with this project because of the trickery) told me that your group will accept almost anything regardless of the scientific process, this was my experiment to see if he is correct.” Was Navid’s cynicism warranted?
Anti-GMO protestors’ reactions
Judge for yourself. The reaction to the evolving hoax was fascinating—and disturbing. Anti-GMO protestors around the world had picked up on Navid’s pseudo-campaign, reposting his pictures and putting up posts of their own stating that it was better that people go blind than to support the growing of genetically modified vitamin A enhanced Golden Rice—developed not by Monsanto but by a devoted team of independent scientists and foundations donating their time and expertise—that health experts say could save millions from blindness and death.
The anti-GMOers parroted the words of Trierry Vrain, a former Canadian biotech researcher who has gone rogue, and is now committed to gutting the development of Golden Rice and other independent, life-saving independent GMO innovations.
Navid reveals his prank
By this time, Navid had had enough. It was time for him to end the deception. This is what he wrote on his blog :
To my new friends from March Against Monsanto:
I apologize, I have tricked you for many days now, and I must now stop because I am getting scared of your community, and even though I do not respect your ways, you are humans and I feel bad tricking you into thinking I am one of your group. You mean well, but you are not using science in a good way to help Madagascar.
There was no March Against Monsanto (MAM) in Madagascar. I made the signs and gave them to my friends to see what your group would say. My teacher (who does not agree with this project because of the trickery) told me that your group will accept almost anything regardless of the scientific process, this was my experiment to see if he is correct. In my opinion, he is correct, and your group should not have the same respect as people who are careful about their science. When we talk about science, we must be very careful how we use peoples emotions, otherwise it is manipulation.
Below I will put the pictures from our fake protest and write my real thoughts. During this experiment I was encouraged and instructed by MAM organizers to destroy or damage golden rice experiments. I was encouraged to allow locusts to eat all our food crops instead of allowing the emergency use of insecticides (this is a very difficult problem for the Malagasy people!). The signs and “memes” below were made to have no factual truth and are very offensive to many Malagasy people, and yet you shared them, you say you will use them in your marketing, and you encouraged me to take more pictures of “people with diseases” to spread your message. You encouraged me to mistrust a man from the USA who starts organic school gardens here, just because he also thinks that agriculture is complicated and biotechnologies might be able to help us. You encouraged me to stop working with this man and focus instead on vandalizing my imaginary gold rice experiments. This was offensive and unpleasant for me to experience.
My experiment was also a failure in another way. I made my signs in a way that I thought was so extreme and offensive that they would be rejected by your community. Instead, all of the signs received compliments, and I could not think of anything more extreme until I searched your own website! My signs were untrue, offensive, and even incoherent or contradictory – but after my experiment, when I look at your websites I ask myself “What is the difference?”.
For Madagascar, I think we will be better off if we have nothing to do with March Against Monsanto. I think Monsanto is probably not a good company. I do not know if biotechnology will be good for Madagascar. One thing that I do know is that March Against Monsanto is not an organization that is able to help the Malagasy people learn about the risks and benefits of biotechnology in any meaningful way. Thank you for keeping your signs and “memes” out of our country, we welcome you back when you learn about what science is.
Thank you,
Navid Rakotofala
What follows is Navid’s photo expose—his key postings and his commentaries about each of them. Click on each tile to view full-size.
Navid had had enough of the protestors’ callousness and willingness to exploit the vulnerabilities of the poor and helpless. “There are many more things I could tell you about my experiment to see what it is like in the extremist anti-science group #MarchAgainstMonsanto,” Navid wrote, “but I think the examples above give an example of how this group is willing to spread bad information at any cost.”
Anti-GMO protestors’ fallout and backlash
What happened when Navid revealed the hoax–confessing who he was, what he had done and why? The fallout from his trickery has intense. After Navid asked March Against Monsanto activists to stop their anti-science propaganda approach, the very first response was a diatribe from a prominent activist in Amsterdam who threatened the young Malagasy boy, writing he was now “forced” to launch an investigation into the funding of Navid’s school system. Navid, he wrote, had served “a dis-justice [to himself] but also [to his] community. I for one take this personally as I am sure others will.” He said was going to try to get Navid’s and the school’s funding revoked.
Perhaps this European MAM activist was unaware of the school-funding crisis in Madagascar and how callous his threat was. Perhaps he is unaware of the complex socio-dynamics of a white man threatening a young Malagasy student. Regardless, Navid is now safely with his family in the remote and impoverished southwestern bush. I need only hint at the blinding irony of a MAM organizer claiming that someone else’s activism is too personal! Look in the mirror much?
Other activists claimed that Monsanto must have been behind this trickery. Then they pointed a finger at me, that I must be the “biotechnology fat cat” who put this little bird in Navid’s ear. I’ve had a least one MAM organizer troll through seemingly every post I’ve ever made, leaving nasty messages all over my Facebook account, accusing me of trying to destroy the national parks of Madagascar.
Justice for Navid
Let me conclude by outlining why MAM’s thinking here is so funny, sad and dangerous. Navid needs your help to get some justice!
My paltry educational lab in Toliara, the Positive Education Action-Research (PEAR) Laboratory, is a fully volunteer effort to date. Okay, full disclosure, I received a paltry ~$200 USD in honorarium from the University of Toliara twice over two years, but that was certainly not from Monsanto. My efforts have focused on civic education and science education, most recently partnering with the university’s new agricultural research farm to chart a path towards organic school and community-based gardens, along with applied research in organic or non-GMO seed saving trials. I am formerly a certified organic vegetable gardener and grass-fed beef producer in Maine and Pennsylvania. I am a supporter of organic farming who holds a very moderate position on “GMOs in Madagascar”. I approach the issue from the psychology of science field, assuming all humans are fail-able to the evolved emotional reasoning systems of our minds, myself most stringently included.
My moderate position combined with Navid’s appeal to reason have lead to a smattering of personal insults I find deplorable (and this despite my original disapproval of Navid’s trickery, and despite MAM organizers issuing a surprising call for silence among their ranks – embarrassed that their leadership has seemingly threatened Navid’s non-existent school funding!).
With all this noisy drama it is easy to forget the real point of Navid’s guerilla activism; he had one simple and clear request that MAM and the Anti-GMO crowd have yet to address:
“Please stop using the non-scientific and inflammatory approach of spreading false information about genetically modified crops and attacking people personally.”
It’s fine to be against Monsanto if that’s what you believe; it’s fine to believe that biotechnology doesn’t have all the answers we need. In fact it doesn’t. What isn’t fine is to create a political machine with an organizational culture designed around the antithesis of what we know about the healthy role of science. What isn’t fine is to idelogically engage with impressionable youth in the most impoverished regions in the world, and allow junk science or non-science to flow free while authentic education remains scarce.
The keyword here is capacity. We can either build capacity or squander it, the MAM approach offers nothing but a divisive waste of energy. The March Against Monsanto leadership directed Navid to destroy imaginary Golden Rice fields while denigrating my efforts in teaching my students about organic agriculturre because I was a falsely cast as a biotech fat cat.
Madagascar deserves far better, the Atsimo Andrefana region doesn’t have time to make signs and spout nonsense; we need everyone at the table using real science to find real solutions. Everyone should be able to agree to that.
Navid’s project has been a true wake-up call to me regarding how extremist and anti-science the anti-biotechnology movement leadership has become. It may be impossible to change minds, but perhaps Navid’s simple plea, “please, stop using this approach”, is something we can ask, and ask, and ask of the anti-GMO activists until they do?
Dustin Eirdosh, research director, The Positive Education Action-Research (PEAR) Laboratory, Faculty of Life Science
Brilliant! Navid is heir to the world’s great satire traditions.
The problem is that these images are going to spread around the internet and most people won’t know that they are fake. It might have done more harm than good.
If idiots are going to fall for these images, then they would fall for other fake stuff anyways. It just makes it easier to show how crazy ad ignorant they are when they try to use this as proof of anything.
Eating Lemurs=Profit……… this makes sense to you=Lost cause.
Consider that Navid found the MAM supporters’ own posts more extreme and offensive. This group and others like it are already spreading all manner of bogus information, appealing to people who are as unlikely as themselves to think about things beyond the surface. So while these images may now be taken up and spread as fact, it’s not as if they weren’t already doing it. And they get really upset when anyone points out that the ridiculous things they spread stamp out any possible shreds of fact there may be.
I will testify that they are indeed doctored. There is a need for further investigation if “Navid” exists at all. Or worse, if any harm has come to him as a result of his plea to people involved with MAM.
I will testify, that the picture of the “conversation” was doctored. Likewise, you can see by the different time stamps and sizes of the font are different. There may have been a hoax, but what if there wasn’t? What if “Navid” really was in danger? Let this be a lesson on how people need to be more exacting of integrity, rather than sensationalism with false accusations, that as you say, will do more harm than good.
If you stand for something based on lies, you’ll fall for anything,
1. Kill lemurs
2. Eat lemurs
3. ???
4. Profit!
HA! gnomes
Right it’s like logic is dead. How at all would killing and eating baby lemurs be profitable. Further more how can i get in on said profits.
Wow. It was tricks and outright lies that lead me down the path of science. I was inclined that way, but this makes me believe in Big Orga even more.
opening paragraph I think you mean “march” but type “match”.
(just trying to help!)
Thanks!!
Brilliant
MAM and European Anti-gmo activists are unfortunately set on interferring with African development. This is deadly serious mistake on their part. GMOs will be most useful in developing nations.
One organizer told Navid that he should tell me to “go back to America” and that I had no business helping these kids out, in the same chat explicitly instructing Navid on the practical nuances of vandalizing a golden rice trial (which does not actually even exist here)
wonderful, buddy. your student is brilliant. i wish i could do the same thing to some other ideological, profiteering, snake-oil salesmen groups….. hmm….
I can’t say I’m surprised by the extreme responses from the MAM supporters. I bring up reality and rational thought less and less often in response to the ridiculous things that many people post, particularly around conspiracy theories. Their rules seem to be:
1. Be skeptical (unless you’re skeptical of our position. That’s not acceptable).
2. Absence of evidence is the strongest evidence. The less evidence we find in support of our position and the more we find against it, the more valid our position is.
3. Claims of anecdotal evidence are stronger than any objective evidence.
The upshot of it all is that speaking out against things like MAM will, at best, result in being ignored. They take their theories at least as seriously as a deeply religious person takes their religion and, as with some religious people, there are plenty who believe that the penalty for doubting them ought to be death or serious physical harm.
“The very first response was a diatribe from a prominent activist in Amsterdam who threatened the young Malagasy boy, writing he was now “forced” to launch an investigation into the funding of Navid’s school system. Navid, he wrote, had served “a dis-justice [to himself] but also [to his] community. I for one take this personally as I am sure others will.” He said was going to try to get Navid’s and the school’s funding revoked.”
MAM — you reap as you sow. Yes, this was entrapment but I am going to have a hard time feeling sorry for MAM Kool-Aid drinkers who are incensed by this. I’ve no doubt that their leaders and followers would have no shame in instigating a similar entrapment. For a movement that makes full use of the freedom of speech, even to the point of asking society to tolerate inciteful, slanderous and dubiously truthful rhetoric and street theatre, it is revealing that its members resort to retaliation and intimidation to punish others from exercising their right to free speech. Practice what you preach — learn from this incident and move on, don’t confirm your hypocrisy. If you want the moral high ground, earn it.
.
I provided a link below to an excellent article that I suggest frames the issues surrounding application of biotechnology to address opportunities and solutions to agronomic challenges in agriculture in a more productive and sensible manner. I will never participate in a MAM event, nor pay much attention to it, not because I believe its adherents have no right to question the implications of biotech, but precisely because I believe they have defined the issues very poorly.
The anti-gmo community will ultimately lose the argument that genetic engineering, as a process, is inherently fraught with dangers not present with other methods. Additionally, the author of the linked article makes the point that now and into the future, the controversy has been and will continue to be not about the process per se, but about certain applications of the process and who is in control of that process. I tend agree with the author that the process based approach to regulation rather than trait based (i.e. not what technology was used, but how the technology was used) “creates huge financial barriers for GM crop introduction, which ironically is one of the main reasons why almost the only applications in the field today are driven by big business”. No harm in taking a look and seeing the arguments make sense.
http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1001887
If you love science for the betterment of our world, then you should hate Monsanto! The whole entire reason for standing against them is that they lie about this! Our mission is based on facts, facts you seem to have missed, if you did any research at all. Their track record shows that they have deceived us before by saying their products were perfectly safe and were quite the contrary. They fight to make sure GMO’s are not labeled and they fight to shut down traditional farms and take away our choice! They have infiltrated our government and food system on every level that ensures this happens. Their GM crops do NOT grow better and are NOT healthy by any means! They require much larger amounts of pesticides and herbicides that are killing our bees! How can anyone think this is good! ? There is MUCH proof against them and lies like this only serve to help them to take away our food sovereignty and help them poison the world! I could go on forever about the atrocities they have committed, not in the name of science or humanity, but in pursuit of the almighty dollar! I hope you become very ashamed of yourself when the world realizes what a huge mistake it was to allow this to happen. I hope your name goes down in history with the Notorious Monsantoto all future generations left to clean up this mess! All you have done here is add to the lies of an evil conglomerate and hurt a noble cause. This cause is to save our world!
This is uncalled for Deedee: ” I hope your name goes down in history with the Notorious Monsanto to all future generations left to clean up this mess!”. If you take a moment to read the article you will see I am actually a former organic farmer, organic farming educator, and I DO think Monsanto has made and continues to make many grave mistakes. The ONLY point Navid and I made here is that the method of discourse is not appropriate for something so important as food policy in Madagascar. These “memes” are a danger to my students just getting on the internet for the first time. I am in no meaningful way “pro-GMO”, and the fact that not a single “anti-GMO” person has yet to demonstrate basic civility to me over our ‘minor’ points of disagreement shows exactly why this approach is so dangerous and divisive. I am happy to answer any other questions if you do not understand this important point. However, please try to be nice, and please read the article in full ;)
You seem to do a lot of speaking for “Navid”. Let him speak for himself. There is something suspect about how you do all the talking for him.
I address this in your longer comment in which you threaten me with a lawsuit repeatedly. Since these threats of financial harm are the primary substantive response from MAM folks, WHY on earth would you think anyone connected to the project would be willing to speak out?
If you hate monsanto (and as I write, I largely agree) – then you should love Navid! Start policing the garbage communications within the Anti-GMO extremes and the potentially valid points of the issues will start to gain mainstream respect. It’s that simple ;)
This is a meaningless hoax. Every single movement that has ever existed will contain–if it is more than a cultish clique–wildly varying levels of understanding and experience among its constituents. This hoax took someone who claimed to be from the area and a potential victim of the issue they were advocating (a good person to listen to) and people from around the world gave them the benefit of the doubt (a good thing to do) considering their enemy was a company we should all want destroyed.
If I saw these Facebook posts I probably would have passively agreed and shown some small level of solidarity as well. That doesn’t prove I’m anti-science, nor that I fully agree with and endorse word-for-word what the movement organizer advocates–if we wait for that kind of consensus we are not going to get anywhere with anything.
The irony is that I agree with the main thrust: that we should put the role of science in perspective and not chuck it out for new age mysticism about “nature”, but this project proved nothing, and its net effect is probably just going to be to harm the credibility of anti-GMO and anti-Monsanto activists.
Drew – you almost win the prize for approaching a reasonable response from the Anti-GMO community, almost but not quite. I am very glad that you agree with the main thrust of the article, though I think you are missing the nuances regarding how damaging crappy meaningless memes are to this debate.
No one thinks that “Navid” has successfully ‘proven’ anything – although you are certainly demonstrating something in your willingness to admit you may have passively shared his work.
If you genuinely cared about getting the science right on this issue, perhaps you would click “like”, but also then send “Navid” a polite note explaining that his signs could actually really hurt the cause since they are so obviously meaningless drivel. That is what responsible science-based communities do all the time.
This may hurt Anti-GMO activists because its a clear example of their shining problem – I believe the anti-gmo activists are more than capable of completely fixing any and all of this damage by promoting the end of these sorts of practices – as requested by “Navid”, and many many more of us who agree with that very basic request.
All I want is for one Anti-GMO activist to message me saying “I HATE GMO’s and I think Navid is a hurtful trickster – but I DO stand by his request – we must stop using these extreme tactics”…. care to be that guy?
Your hoax was dishonest and targeted individuals who were trying to help a person who allegedly reached out and claimed he was being threatened. Several people told him that it was not a good idea to go to try and vandalize the test rice fields. The evidence you are using is scant and unreliable and libelous. It certainly would not hold up in a court of law. Why did you try and pigeonhole everyone who participated in the March Against Monsanto as crazed, anti-science? Furthermore, one of your posts elsewhere ..the apology letter from “Navid” shows a picture of the blind man holding a sign. The person who made the statement, “there are people who would “rather go blind” meant it metaphorically as indicated by the quotation marks and was further explained during that conversation that took place not with “Navid” but with an individual named “Dustin” in an attempt to understand the reasons why “Navid” would use a blind person to hold the sign. This picture above has been doctored to make it appear as if the conversation was with “Navid.” During that conversation, “Dustin” was describing “Navid” in no uncertain terms as an unstable individual. So why would he say in his apology letter, that the individual said it to him? If “Navid” even exists at all. Perhaps this should warrant further investigation to determine that “Navid” is real, or worse, if his plea for help meant he was really in danger. How low will people go to discredit people who are sincere. If they share information that is erroneous, it is your responsibility to correct them with more meaningful information, not with more lies and hoaxes.You would be wise to cease and desist with this hoax before you find yourself further encumbered with a lawsuit. This is not the way to draw attention to your needs of funding for your projects at your school and hurts your chances in the future because this documentation is a representation of your character more so than the people you used for your hoax. I for one would not donate to your cause after investigating your story.
You ask “How low will people go to discredit people who are sincere.”? I think you answer your own question, and apparently it is pretty low indeed. To answer your questions, threats, and comments:
>Both Navid and I readily admit that “Navid” does NOT actually exist, his photo is of a frog butcher from Tana, and the actions of Navid are not of one individual but a small group, which likely does include at least one foreigner. Kudos to you for cracking the conspiracy wide open, but please consider:
>There is indeed a young Malagasy teen who centrally organized the hoax. And while I readily admit to having taught ‘Navid’ about the GMO political discourse and approaches in digital democracy, for obvious reasons I do not condone his trickery.
>You ask, ‘where is Navid’s voice now?’ and in the same thread – threaten me with a lawsuit, wish ill-funding to my organic school garden project, and know full well that ‘Navid’ was threatened with the same – WHO would want to own up to a project like this after that treatment? Isn’t that the same methods you criticize Big-Ag of using on Anti-GMO researchers? This was this kids first rough-shod attempt at digital activism, he clearly did have assistance, but it wasn’t me and it unlikely was Monsanto either (but maybe you should spend lots of time checking on that because if it was Monsanto – it would totally refute Navid’s central point right????).
>You accuse me of ‘doing this’ to draw attention to the funding needs of my project. As you well point out, the exact opposite is true, putting me in the uncomfortable position of not being free to comment on an incident I do believe has meaning (however cruel it was to those MAMster’s involved).
>You instruct me to “cease and desist” the hoax…. as should be clear – this is NOT “my hoax”, and it is already clearly over – for many weeks now. Perhaps you mean I should cease and desist talking about it? Any beef you might have with the ‘edited’ facebook clippings should be directed to GLP editor – Jon Entine. This is an opinion piece based on the facts I have at hand.
>Rather than threaten me with go-no-where lawsuits, might I suggest you view Navid’s hoax as a genuine gift to the Anti-GMO movement. If you followed Navid’s advice and began to police your community to acceptable practices in scientific discourse, the Anti-GMO movement would have it’s first shot at legitimacy.
>If you care enough about the cause, care enough to make sure the conservation happens properly.
You call my opinion piece ‘libelous’ for critiquing an organization that demonstrably promotes the notion that “Monsanto = AIDS/HIV & Baby Killing”?
Why don’t you just address ‘Navid’s’ central and ONLY message “please stop this approach!”
pro GMO groupies are all here…?
you should watch gmo omg on netflix.
so… I H A T E G M O !!!!!!!!!!