CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
In India, agricultural services have a limited scale, sustainability, and impact. Public
extension services reach only 6.8 percent of farmers on average. According to NSSO (2014),
only 11% of the 40.6% of households who received extension assistance received services
from physical government machinery extension agents, Krishi Vigyan Kendras, and
agricultural universities. This void must be filled by investigating alternative agricultural
extension service delivery mechanisms. Information and communication technologies (ICTs)
can deliver agricultural extension information more easily, quickly, and accurately. 1 Web
portals, telecommunication centres, mobile telephony, and hybrid projects are examples of
ICT-based agricultural applications (ICTs with traditional extension elements)2. In India, the
mass media, including the internet, is now the second most important source of useful
information for agricultural households.3 Furthermore, the Indian Ministry of Agriculture has
endorsed ICT interventions.4 Recently, two mobile apps for crop insurance applications and
agriculture markets (agmarknet) were released.5 Social media is yet another ICT-based tool
that, while primarily used for entertainment, has enormous potential for use in knowledge
sharing and collaboration, even in agriculture.6 These ICT tools are relatively simple to use
and are gaining traction in the agricultural sector.7 Farmers can co-create content on social
media, which promotes farmer collaboration and learning. 8 Furthermore, content creation
through social media is faster than through traditional mass media channels of extension
1
World Bank (2016). World Development Report 2016: Digital Dividends. Washington, DC.
Shanthinichandra, Karthikeyan and Mohanraj (2013). Farmers’ Willingness to Pay (WTP) Behavior for ICT
Based Extension Approach, International J. of Exten. Ed, Ed Vol.9:24-31
3
NSSO(2014). Key Indicators of Situation of Agricultural Households in India, NSS 70th Round, Ministry of
Statistics and Programme Implementation Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, GOI, New
Delhi.
4
ICAR (2016). Reaching out to farmers through e extension initiatives, Flyer, Indian Council of Agricultural
Research (ICAR), January 14, New Delhi. Available:
5
GOI (2015). Two Mobile Apps Launched for Farmers, Press Information Bureau, Government of India
December http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=133861 [June 9,2016]
6
Goyal, A (2011). ICT in Agriculture Sourcebook: Connecting Smallholders to Knowledge, Networks, and
Institutions, World Bank, Washington D.C.
7
Saravanan, R. and Bhattacharjee, S (2014). Social media: New generation tools for "agricultural extension"
AESA blog No.42, December, 2014.
8
Jackson. C., Berdou. E., Ngounoue. V., Kreutz. C. and Clark. L (2009). Use of social media to share
knowledge on agricultural impact, planning, assessment and learning. People Centered Performance, Working
Paper, Agricultural Learning and Impacts Network, London, U.K.
2
1
communication.9 Social media allows for easy real-time interaction with farmer clients. As a
result, these tools facilitate instant and low-cost communication with stakeholders. 10 The
advantages of social media extend beyond cost-effective communication to empowering
social connections and long-term participation in extension programs.11 Social media can be a
good way for the farming community to network and gain social capital in the form of trust,
engagement, and community involvement. 12 Furthermore, these tools can help to reduce
physical distance and isolation in agriculture. Social media has been aptly described as one of
the most participatory extension tools in recent history. Facebook, Whatsapp, We chat, QQ,
Tumblr, Twitter, Pinterest, Blogs, YouTube, Instagram, Wikis, Facebook messenger,
Snapchat, and other social media tools are available. In the Indian context, the three most
popular social media tools are Facebook, WhatsApp, and YouTube. These three types of
social media have slightly different approaches. Facebook, in particular, is a social
networking site that allows users to create personal web pages and then connect with friends
to share content and information. In the Use of Social Media in Agricultural Extension India,
Facebook remains the most popular social media platform among agricultural research and
extension professionals.13 WhatsApp, in particular, is an instant messaging platform that has
greatly increased user connectivity. Facebook's nature is more of a public platform with more
viral content than WhatsApp, which is a relatively closed medium. YouTube is still a content
community where videos are watched and shared. The World Development Report (2016)
has rightly observed, public extension agents can overcome information barriers related to
new agricultural practices and technologies, but such extension programs have been burdened
by limited scale, sustainability, and impact. In many countries, farmers' personal contacts
with extension agents are thus severely limited. In India, for example, only 91,288 of the
143,863 positions in the Department of Agriculture are filled. Given a large number of farm
households in India, this small number of positions means that extension services reach only
6.8 percent of farmers on average. Due to the limited personal access to extension agents,
9
Lucas C. F (2011). An analysis and recommendations of the use of social media within the Co-operative
extension system: Opportunities, Risks and Barriers. Honors Thesis, Presented to the College of Agriculture,
Life Sciences, Social Sciences of Cornell University, USA.
10
Newbury, E, Humphreys, L, and Fuess, L(2014). Over the Hurdles: Barriers to Social. Media Use in
Extension Offices, J. of Exten. 52
11
Neill, O.B., Zumwalt, A. and Bechman, J. (2011). Social Media Use of Cooperative Extension Family
Economics Educators: Online Survey Results and Implications. J. of Exten
12
Stanley, S (2013).Harnessing Social Media in Agriculture. A Report for the New Zealand Nuffield Farming
Scholarship Trust.NZ Nuffield Scholar
13
Meena, K.C., Chand, S. and Meena, N.R (2013). Impact of social media in sharing information on issues
related to agriculture among researchers and extension professionals Adv. Appl. Res, 5(2): 166 ‐ 169.
2
farmers are forced to rely on other sources of information, such as mobile phones and Internet
kiosks, or to seek advice from other farmers and input dealers. It is now widely accepted that
delivering extension services through personal contacts is neither feasible nor cost-effective.
The Government of India has elaborate arrangements for not only Research & Development
in Agriculture but also hosts a massive mechanism for technology transfer to farmers with
642 Krishi Vigyan Kendra and over 101 Agri-research institutions (KVKs-Farm Science
Centers). Despite this, more than 59% of farm households in India received no assistance
from either government or private agricultural extension services (the latest NSSO survey
70th Round). No surprise, agricultural productivity for major crops and livestock species in
India remains lower than global averages. Despite its numerous benefits, there is considerable
skepticism about its use in professional activities.14 Some of the reported constraints include
the use of time allocation for social media and personal privacy concerns about the
information in social media. In addition, a lack of awareness and skills in using social media
has been identified as a major reason for field-level extensions' limited use of social media.15
These constraints can be overcome through social media sensitization, awareness, and
training. Another approach is to document and disseminate best practices for social media
use. This can help extension educators learn about the use of social media in agricultural
extension. 16 It has been discovered that peer use influences the use of social media in
agricultural activities.17 A number of studies have also been conducted on the use of social
media by agricultural researchers and extension educators. There hasn't been much research
done on how farmers use social media to share farming-related information. There is a clear
need to document how it is being used for the direct benefit of the farming community. This
would not only raise awareness of the use of social media tools for farm extension
information delivery, but it would also assess the current state of social media usage. The
paper provides examples of how the three most popular social media tools (Facebook,
WhatsApp, and YouTube) are being used in agriculture and related fields in India. It looks
into how farmers and agricultural research and development organisations use social media to
14
Saravanan, R. and Bhattacharjee S (2016). Social media policy guidelines for agricultural extension and
advisory services GFRAS Interest Group on ICT4RAS
15
Saravanan, R. and Bhattacharjee S (2016). Social media policy guidelines for agricultural extension and
advisory services GFRAS Interest Group on ICT4RAS
16
Lucas C. F (2011). An analysis and recommendations of the use of social media within the Co-operative
extension system: Opportunities, Risks and Barriers. Honors Thesis, Presented to the College of Agriculture,
Life Sciences, Social Sciences of Cornell University, USA.
17
Newbury, E, Humphreys, L, and Fuess, L(2014). Over the Hurdles: Barriers to Social. Media Use in
Extension Offices, J
3
deliver and share farming-related information. Based on these examples of social media use,
recommendations for effective social media use to improve agriculture extension education
efforts have been made.
A Brief About social media
The interaction with people in which they create, share, consume, and
exchange information and ideas in virtual communities and networks are referred to
as social media. Social media is defined as "a collection of Internet-based applications
that build on the conceptual and technological foundations of Web 2.0 and enable the
creation and exchange of user-generated content." "Social media are web-based
communication tools that enable users to exchange information individually or in
groups, share ideas and opinions, make decisions, and create, store, retrieve, and
exchange information." - Allows anyone in the virtual world to provide the facility of
providing (text, images, videos, etc.).18 These are digital networks that rely on usergenerated information (opinions, etc.). To share and discuss, video, audio, and
multimedia are used. Merriam-Webster defines social media as "forms of electronic
communication in which user information and ideas can be used to create online
communities in which personal messages and other content can be shared." 19 The
definition focuses on three core components – content, community, and Web 2.0 – as
well as the use of social media as a form of human interaction. In addition, he
contributes to content creation, exchange, and viral dual communities and networks.
Why social media
Is social media useful in agriculture? Although many outsiders would never
associate farmers, dairy farmers, and animal keepers with Facebook and Twitter, they
both represent a sizable group of social networking site users. Some farmers and
scientists believe that social media is an essential communication tool for educating
18
Saravanan, R., and Bhattacharjee, S. (2016). Social media policy guidelines for agricultural extension and
advisory services GFRAS Interest Groupon ICT4RAS.
19
Merriam-Webster. 2015. ‘Social media’ retrieved from http://www MerriamWebster.com/social-media/
4
farmers about their industry. As discussed below, social media can be useful in
agriculture20
1. Extremely cost-effective
2. Reaches a large number of clients at the same time.
3. Client- and location-specific, problem-solving
4. Community member discussion and user-generated content
5. Mobile phones can easily access it.
6. Increases extension organizations’ internet presence and client reach.
7. Information democratization by making it available to all.
8. Consolidates all stakeholders on a single platform.
9. Can track the number of visitors, friends, followers, mentions, and Facebook likes
to determine reach and success?
Social Media Tools Commonly Used in Agriculture
In recent years, the use of social media in agriculture and extension has grown,
with only popular platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube being used for
agriculture and extension-related work. WhatsApp is another popular platform for
extension professionals to communicate with peer or client farmers, but because
communication (individual and group) is personal, more information about groups is
available other than what is reported in the media. Is not. The various social media
tools that are currently popular are listed below.
Facebook
Facebook is the most popular social media platform in the world, with
over 1.87 billion monthly active users. This means that extension professionals
20
Saravanan, R. Suchiradipta, B., Chowdhury, A., Hambly O. H., and Hall, K (2015). Social Media for Rural
Advisory Services. Note 15. Good Practice Notes for Extension and Advisory Services. GFRAS: Lindau,
Switzerland.
5
have a lot of opportunities. Individuals, professional networks, and extension
organizations, for example, are using Facebook as an extension tool.
Twitter
Website for microblogging With 320 million users, Twitter is one of
the most popular social media platforms in the world. It has been one of the
major catalysts used in the social context for forming public opinions and
organizing people into groups. It is also one of the most popular platforms in
agriculture.
YouTube
YouTube It is a video-sharing platform founded on four core values:
freedom of expression, freedom of information, freedom of opportunity, and
freedom of belonging. Users can upload and watch videos, and there is a
feature for sharing and commenting on videos, as well as additional features
for other users' subscriptions.
Blogs
Blogs provide in-depth information on specific topics. Through reader
comments, they create and facilitate an in-depth discussion on any topic. With
increased popularity, many blog competitions for rural youth are being
organized around the world to encourage them to start a discussion about
farming. Even organizations such as the World Bank, the Food and
Agriculture Organization (FAO), and the International Food Policy Research
Institute (IFPRI) have blogs to announce new publications such as policy
papers, working papers, reports, and so on; to communicate summaries of
important publications, and to increase awareness and discussion on important
issues related to agriculture and rural development.
WhatsApp
It is an internet-based messaging platform for smartphones that
supports text, audio, video, pdf, and various other file formats. Real-time
video chatting has recently been added, increasing its popularity among users.
The app currently has over one billion users in 180 countries. Though initially
6
used for personal messaging, it is becoming increasingly popular among
agricultural professionals and practitioners for information sharing, which is
aided by the group messaging feature. In India, there are several hundred
thousand WhatsApp groups dedicated to agricultural extension and advisory
services.
Role of Social Media in Farming
In the global context, the agricultural sector is utilizing social media to
disseminate relevant industry information and knowledge, as well as to network with
other like-minded agricultural professionals. Social media channels improved and
strengthened agri-based communities' relationships and assisted rural workers in
combating the segregation caused by their work. It has crossed geographical
boundaries, bringing peasant communities together in mutual interest.
So far, blogs have a large presence covering agriculture, animal husbandry,
health, education, and other general interest topics. Social media platforms such as
Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and blogs are emerging as appropriate platforms for
sharing information and raising awareness among various stakeholders in order to
generate and shape event content. These media, which use images, links, and videos
to market agricultural products and their products, supplement traditional media as a
viable source of information. They enable users to share and exchange information,
discuss pressing agricultural issues based on their knowledge and experience, and
formulate effective solutions to such problems, thereby marketing and building
networks.
1.1.
Traditional Media
Newspapers and magazines were among the first forms of mass media, distributing
news, entertainment, and advertisements to the public. These media sources remained at the
heart of mass media, but they began to evolve in tandem with technological advancements.
Over time, new communication technologies evolved and gradually gained acceptance
among the general public and organizations. The introduction of radio entertainment in the
early 1920s and television in the 1940s changed the way people interacted with the media.
The Internet is the most recent technology that has altered the way people communicate. "The
7
introduction of social media and Internet adoption has changed how many people seek and
receive information."21
1.2. The Internet and the Emergence of social media
The World Wide Web's introduction in 1989 was the first technological advancement
that provided a foundation for the development of social media. The World Wide Web, later
known as the Internet, forever altered the way individuals and organisations interacted with
and connected with the media.22 Basic web pages and limited personal messaging via email
were among the first forms of communication technology in Web 1.0. 23 Despite no
technological changes, the World Wide Web entered a new phase, Web 2.0, which enabled
more interactive and advanced applications to improve user experience. Web 2.0's interactive
and technologically advanced qualities aided in the emergence of social media as the most
recent form of communication technology. 24 Since its inception in the late 1980s and early
1990s, social media has taken many forms and evolved. Text messaging, chat rooms, social
network sites, email, and instant messaging are all examples of social media. Although social
media can refer to a wide range of communication mediums, many people today only think of
social network sites (SNSs) as social media. A social networking site is defined as the
following:
“Web-based services that allow individuals to (1) construct a public or
semi-public profile within a bounded system, (2) articulate a list of other users
with whom they share a connection, and (3) view and traverse their list of
connections and those made by others in the system.”
SNSs are distinct modes of communication in that they move social networks that may or
may not have previously existed outside of the web, making the networks visible through an
online platform. 25 Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, d Instagram are just a few of the social
21
Public Broadcasting Service. (n.d.). The Development of Radio. Retrieved from
www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/rescue/sfeature/radio.html
22
Pew Research Center. (2014, Mar. 11). World Wide Web Timeline. Retrieved from
http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/03/11/world-wide-web-timeline/
23
Boyd, M. (2013, Aug. 16). Social media’s role in modern public relations. Retrieved
From http://www.prdaily.com/Main/Articles/Social_medias_role_in_modern
Role_in_modern_public_relations_15017.aspx
24
Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010, Jan. 1). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of
Social Media. Business Horizons, 53(1), 59-68.
25
Boyd, D.M., & Ellison, N. B. (2008, Oct. 1). Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship.
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210-230.
8
media platforms that allow people to communicate with one another online. Each of these
SNS is distinct in the way it allows users to interact and comes with its own set of
affordances. Facebook is currently the most popular SNS, with 71% of all adults online and
1.3 billion active accounts.26 Facebook began as a way for university students to connect with
one another, and registration required a university email address, but due to increased
popularity, it was made available to the general public in 2005. 27 Individuals can use
Facebook to create a profile, upload photos, and videos, leave messages on other users' walls,
and like interest, group, or business pages. Individuals and organizations can not only post
originally content on Facebook, but they can also share the content of other users on their
Facebook profile pages.
1.3. Organizations and social media
Previously, organizations were unable to achieve certain goals due to technological
limitations, but social media has reduced those limitations. 28 Organizational use of social
media has become nearly universal, but not all organizations were quick to adopt social
media as a communication tool. Early research on social media adoption by organizations
looked at how people used organizations’ websites. It was discovered that the ability to
connect with other people and organizations was the most valuable feature of websites. As a
result, many organizations saw social media as a viable communication tool because it allows
them to connect with customers in novel ways. Organizations benefit from social media
adoption because it has evolved into a tool that bridges the gap between individual and
consumer desires and organizational goals.29 Visibility, edibility, persistence, and association
are some of the advantages of using social media. These advantages, combined with Web
2.0's improved technology, enable organizations to engage in a two-way conversation with
their customers. 30 Social media has not only aided organizations in reaching out to their
26
Pew Research Center. (2014a). Social Newtworking Fact Sheet. Retrieved from
http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheets/social-networking-fact-sheet/
27
Boyd, D.M., & Ellison, N. B. (2008, Oct. 1). Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship.
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 212.
28
Curtis, L., Edwards, C., Fraser, K. L., Gudelsky, S., Holmquist, J., Thornton, K., & Sweetser, K. D. (2010,
March 1). Adoption of social media for public relations by nonprofit organizations. Public Relations Review,
36(1), 90.
29
Gordon, R. (2009). Social Media: The Ground Shifts. Nieman Reports, 63 (3), 7
30
Meyers, C., Irlbeck, E., Graybill-Leonard, M., & Doerfert, D. (2011). Advocacy in Agricultural Social
Movements: Exploring Facebook as a Public Relations Communications Tool. Journal of Applied
Communication, 95(3), p. 68.
9
public and consumers, but it has also provided a means to strengthen media relations. 31
Traditionally, organizations handled media relations and public relations through press
releases, advertising, and press conferences, but the adoption of social media allows those
organizations to maintain direct and immediate contact with potential media outlets and
journalists across a variety of platforms.32
1.4. Agricultural Organizations and Social Media
Understanding how agricultural organizations use social media is important because
they are speaking to an older, more rural, and less technologically savvy audience. 33
Individuals and organisations in the agricultural industry must understand how to use new
technology to benefit communication efforts in order to develop a relationship with the
media. Farmers and agricultural communicators frequently lag in technology adoption and
have historically had limited access to new communication technologies.34 Previously, news
and trends in the agricultural industry were communicated through face-to-face interactions,
but social media has changed the way the agricultural industry communicates. 35 More
individuals in the agricultural industry now have access to communication technologies such
as social media, thanks to increased Internet access and mobile technology.36 In recent years,
there have been efforts to educate farmers and others in the agricultural industry about the
importance of social media. The creation of the Ag Chat Foundation is one example. The Ag
Chat Foundation's mission is to "empower farmers and ranchers to connect communities via
social media platforms."37 This online platform encourages farmers to learn about and use
social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter to spread their messages. Ag Chat is just
one of many initiatives aimed at assisting the agricultural industry in becoming an active
participant in the social media world. Because it can be used for marketing, branding,
agricultural news, combating myths and bad publicity, monitoring public opinion, and crisis
31
Eyrich, N., Padman, M. L., & Sweetser, K. D. (November 01, 2008). PR practitioners' use of social media
tools and communication technology. Public Relations Review, 34(4), 412
32
Boyd, M. (2013, Aug. 16). Social media’s role in modern public relations. Retrieved From
http://www.prdaily.com/Main/Articles/Social_medias_role_in_modern
Role_in_modern_public_relations_15017.aspx
33
Barbassa, J. (2010). Farmers defend way of life with Facebook, Twitter. ABC News, Retrieved from
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=11070012
34
Tweeten, J.F. (2014). Perceptions Regarding Importance and Frequency of Use of Selected Communication
Tools by Iowa Cattle Producers. Retrieved from Digital Depository @ Iowa State University. 13749.
35
Varner, J. (2012). Agriculture and Social Media. Retrieved from
http://msucares.com/pubs/infosheets/is1946.pdf
36
Sutter, J. D. (2009, July 2). Twittering from the tractor: Smartphones sprout on the farm. CNN.com. Retrieved
fromhttp://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/07/02/twitter.farmer/ Index.html
37
Ag Chat Foundation. (2014). Retrieved from http://agchat.org
10
and risk communication, social media is extremely valuable to the agricultural industry.38
Farmers and agricultural communicators can now reach audiences who would not have
previously heard their messages.39 The ability to disseminate information more quickly and
directly allows agricultural communicators to disseminate information that may help
consumers and the general public gain a better understanding of the industry as a whole.40
This improved representation of the agricultural industry not only educates individuals but
also gives the industry a face, making it more relatable to consumers and the general public.
The agricultural industry also benefits from social media use because it allows advocates to
reach a younger audience, who will make decisions that affect the industry in the future.41
The agricultural industry is heavily reliant on the public and, as such, requires public support
to survive. Recent agricultural technological developments and political issues have
highlighted the critical importance of effectively communicating agricultural issues to the
general public.42 Because it is well-known among the target audience and has received the
most scholarly attention, Facebook is the most popular social networking site used by
agricultural organizations.43 Farmers are using Facebook to "advocate," tell their stories, and
communicate with customers and the general public. 44 Although Facebook has been an
effective social media platform, agriculturalists believe that in order to be more successful, it
is critical to building interconnectivity between different types of social media.
45
Agriculturalists are happy with how they adopted and used social media and intend to keep
using it as a communication tool.46 As was already said, agricultural communicators use
print and agricultural media as media relations instruments, but they don't think they are
Payn-Knoper, M. (2009, June 10). Twitter’s business value to agriculture. Message posted to
http://causematters.wordpress.com/2009/06/10/twitters-business-valueto-agriculture
39
Knutson, J. (2011). Ag turns to social media to make its case. AGWEEK. Retrieved from
http://www.agweek.com/event/article/id/17797/
40
Allen, K., Abrams, K., Meyers, C., & Shultz, A. (January 01, 2010). A little birdie told me about agriculture:
best practices and future uses of twitter in agricultural communications. (Professional Development). Journal of
Applied Communications, 94, 3-4.
41
Grant, D. (2010, June 17). Stallman: farmers must connect with consumers. Farm Week Now, Retrieved from
http://www.farmweeknow.com/story.aspx?s=39250&c =1&pv=1
42
Roth, C., Vogt, W., & Weinheimer, L. (2002). Joint effort boosts APS’ benefits. AgriMarketing, 40(7), 4
43
Tweeten, J.F. (2014). Perceptions Regarding Importance and Frequency of Use of Selected Communication
Tools by Iowa Cattle Producers. Retrieved from Digital Depository @ Iowa State University. 13749.
44
White, D., Meyers, C., Doerfert, D., & Irlbeck, E. (Eds.). (2014). Proceedings from ACE ’14: Exploring
Agriculturalists’ Use of Social media for Agricultural Marketing. Portland, OR.
45
Meyers, C., Irlbeck, E., Graybill-Leonard, M., & Doerfert, D. (2011). Advocacy in Agricultural Social
Movements: Exploring Facebook as a Public Relations Communications Tool. Journal of Applied
Communication, 95(3), p. 72
46
White, D., Meyers, C., Doerfert, D., & Irlbeck, E. (Eds.). (2014). Proceedings from ACE ’14: Exploring
Agriculturalists’ Use of Social media for Agricultural Marketing. Portland, OR.
38
11
successfully reaching out to mainstream media.47 Since then, limited research has been done
on the use of social media as a media communication tool in agriculture. The success of
social media as a communication tool should further explore social media as a media
communication tool for agricultural organizations.
1.5. PURPOSE & OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this study was to explore the agricultural use of social media in the field of
agriculture Farming.
The following research objectives were used to guide the study:

Find the Effect of social media on Agriculture.

How social media can motivate the Agriculture Farming?

Future of social media in Agriculture.
47
Ruth-McSwain, A. (2008). Penchant for Print: Media Strategies in Communicating Agricultural Information.
Journal of Applied Communications, 92. p-4
12
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
1. INTRODUCTION
The previous chapters discussed traditional news media and social media and their use
and value to the agricultural industry. A theoretical foundation was established for this study
using the agenda-setting theory, uses and gratifications and previous social media use as a
media relations tool by organizations in and outside of the agricultural industry. This chapter
will further describe the design of the study as influenced by the proceeding research.
1.5.
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
The development and use of improved crop varieties are considered essential to increase
agricultural productivity and production. However, especially among smallholder farming
communities in India, the adoption of improved varieties remains relatively low, limiting the
expected yield gains. Farmers' lack of exposure to new varieties has been identified as a
major limitation to wider adoption. Social networks are seen as important mechanisms for
disseminating information and technology, and breeders often infiltrate these informal
organizations using participatory breeding methods family. The philosophy behind these
approaches is that participating farmers will adopt premium varieties and further disseminate
information and seeds through their social networks. However, the specific role of these
networks remains the subject of research.
The agricultural industry is an important industry in Indian society, but there continues to be
a growing disconnect between the agricultural industry and the public. Along with a
shrinking public knowledge base about agriculture, the media coverage of the agricultural
industry is also declining. The introduction of the Internet and digital communication
technologies has changed the way that organizations and the media communicate. Even
though there is a shift from print communications to digital communications, traditional
media remains important to the agricultural industry because consumers and the public
receive their agricultural information via traditional media sources, such as television and
newspapers.
13
Due to the importance of traditional media in disseminating agricultural information, there is
a need to study the expansion of social media as a media relations tool by agricultural
organizations. A study that examines how agricultural organizations are currently using social
media as a media relations tool will benefit the agricultural industry as a whole because
developing effective social as a media relations practice can increase public and consumer
knowledge of the agricultural industry, which in turn leads to future support of the
agricultural industry.
1.6.
SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDIES
Agriculture is important to Indian society socially, economically, and politically, but public
knowledge of and involvement in the agricultural industry has significantly decreased over
the last century. Due to the decreased public knowledge and involvement, news media
coverage of the agricultural industry has also suffered. New communication technologies,
such as the Internet and social media, have also changed how society communicates and
seeks out, and receives information. Even with these changes, traditional media remains
important to the agricultural industry because most individuals receive information about the
agricultural industry through traditional news media.48
Previous research has explored the uses and benefits of social media to organizations and
found social media as a valuable asset because it enables direct communication with the
target audience. Agricultural organizations have also joined the social media movement and
currently use social media tools to “advocate,” talk directly to consumers, and put a face to
the agricultural industry by telling their stories.
Using social media as a media relations tool would not only benefit the local sectors of the
agricultural industry, but it would also benefit the agricultural industry on a national level in
Research Priority Areas. Overall, the Research Priority Areas aim to increase public and
political agricultural literacy, develop new technologies, produce a 21st Century progressive
48
Charanza, A. D., & Naile, T. L. (January 01, 2012). Media dependency during a food safety incident related
to the U.S. beef industry.(Research)(Report). Journal of Applied Communications, 96, 3.)
14
workforce, create effective learning environments and education programs, and support and
develop thriving communities. 49
Increasing media relations practices through social media would drive agricultural
information to the traditional news media, which is seen by those who are and are not a part
of the agricultural industry, which in turn will increase political and public understanding of
the agricultural industry.50 Therefore, to support the research priority areas, the responsibility
indirectly falls to the agricultural communicators to drive agricultural information to the most
effective sources, traditional media. The increased understanding of the agricultural industry
by the public will also support the development of successful communities and the future
agricultural workforce.
1.7.
SOCIAL MEDIA USE FOR MEDIA RELATIONS
The development of social media provided new communication tools that public
relations practitioners can potentially transform into media relations tools. The literature and
research surrounding social media as a public relations tool are scarce because it is still
considered an emerging trend. Below is a summary of the literature on organizations and the
agricultural industry using social media as a public relations tool. Organizations are changing
their methods of public relations because journalists are changing how they retrieve
information. 51 The use of the Internet by newsroom staff to seek out information and
communicate with sources is becoming more popular. Journalists are now participating in
social media discussions, therefore creating a new channel of communication for public
relations professionals to communicate with the news media. 52 Data has been collected to
examine which social media sites are most often used by journalists.53 26% of journalists use
Facebook to retrieve basic information about a source, 34% like receiving newsworthy
49
American Association for Agricultural Education. (2011). National Research Agenda American Association
for Agricultural Education’s Research Priority Areas for 2011-2015. Retrieved from
http://aaaeonline.org/files/research_agenda/AAAE_National_Research_Agenda_(2011--‐15).pdf
50
Wells, C. (2012). Uses of social media by Ohio House of Representatives and Ohio Senate members as it
relates to agricultural policies.[Master’s Thesis]. Retrieved from World Cat
51
Jung, M. S., & Hyun, K. D. (March 01, 2014). Online Media Relations as an Information Subsidy: Quality of
Fortune 500 Companies' Websites and Relationships to Media Salience. Mass Communication and Society, 17,
2, 258-273.
52
Yoo, K. H., & Kim, J. R. (January 01, 2013). How U.S. state tourism offices use online newsrooms and social
media in media relations. Public Relations Review, 39(5) 534-541.
53
TEK Group. (2012). Online newsroom survey report. Retrieved from
http://www.tekgroup.com/onlinenewsroomsurvey/
15
information via a timely tweet, and 31% believe that blogging is the most valuable tool in
developing news stories. The increase in social media as a media relations tool has caused a
call for research to understand this new and emerging trend. A foundation was built for
examining social media as a media relations tool by researching the online newsroom. One
study determined what factors can be attributed to the success of a corporation’s public
relations online newsroom. It was found that strong financial stability and professional
resources allowed the corporation to maintain a more effective online newsroom.54 Although
online newsrooms have become a useful tool for media relations, it was found that most of
the content online newsrooms provided was not complete enough to meet the needs of the
journalists. 55 For example, online newsrooms lacked usability, content availability, and
information distribution. 56 In order to keep up with the changing need of the media,
organizations and, corporations need to develop and utilize online newsrooms to their full
capability.57 From the foundation of the online newsroom analysis, researchers looked at the
role social media played in the online newsroom and its capability to enhance media
relations. One study explored the impact of social media on traditional media practices. It was
found that social media is creating a clearer line of communication between the organization
and journalists. It was also found that many journalists have strayed away from
communicating via traditional channels, such as 32 phone calls and emails, but are willing to
communicate via social media. 58 For example, the Associated Press encourages all AP
journalists to obtain social media accounts and use social media as a source as long as they
follow the sourcing.59 This change in communication practices allows organizations to have
immediate and interactive conversations with the media while providing up-to-date,
unfiltered messages. Social media is valuable in media relations because it has enhanced
54
Jung, M. S., & Hyun, K. D. (March 01, 2014). Online Media Relations as an Information Subsidy: Quality of
Fortune 500Companies' Websites and Relationships to Media Salience. Mass Communication and Society, 17,
2, 258-273.
55
González-Herrero, A., & Ruiz de Valbuena, M. (2006). Trends in online media relations: Web-based
corporate pressrooms in leading international companies. Public Relations Review, 32, 267 Yoo, K. H., & Kim,
J. R. (January 01, 2013). How U.S. state tourism offices use online newsrooms and social media in media
relations. Public Relations Review, 39(5) 534-541– 275
56
Yoo, K. H., & Kim, J. R. (January 01, 2013). How U.S. state tourism offices use online newsrooms and social
media in media relations. Public Relations Review, 39(5) 534-541
57
Jung, M. S., & Hyun, K. D. (March 01, 2014). Online Media Relations as an Information Subsidy: Quality of
Fortune 500Companies' Websites and Relationships to Media Salience. Mass Communication and Society, 17,
2, 258-273.
58
Bajkiewicz, T. E., Kraus, J. J., & Hong, S. Y. (September 01, 2011). The impact of newsroom changes and the
rise of social media on the practice of media relations. Public Relations Review, 37(3), p. 329-331
59
Associated Press. (2013). Social Media Guidelines for AP Employees. Retrieved from
http://www.ap.org/Images/Social-Media-Guidelines_tcm28-9832.pdf
16
traditional media, and newsrooms via new media-and social media. Although there are
benefits to using social media as a communication channel with journalists, poor usability
practices can result in a reduction of positive press coverage Even though social media has
created a new means of communication in media relations practices, the core of media
relations remains to build relationships and retrieve accurate and solid information. 60 The
increased use of the Internet by consumers and individuals to retrieve information has caused
concern about the “ability to tell ‘good’ information from ‘bad’ information” and checking
the credibility of information online can be “The problem for news media comes when the
public struggles to distinguish information produced by trained journalists from information
placed online by groups or individuals with lower standards”
Many organizations and
companies have adopted the use of social media as a media relations tool, but due to the
previously mentioned credibility 33 concerns, public relations professionals still think that the
traditional media practices are more reliable, credible, and accurate.61 Understanding media
relations in the agricultural industry is important because the news media is essential to
disseminating agricultural information to the public, which in turn improves support and
understanding of the agricultural industry in India. 62 News coverage of the agricultural
industry is limited and continues to decline due to the limited agricultural knowledge of the
news media staff.63 There is limited media relations research and strategies that have been
documented in the literature by agricultural communicators. One study used a U&G approach
to understanding media relations and determined that agricultural communicators are ‘talking
to themselves via agricultural media, but not to the mainstream media. Agricultural
communicators are also using print sources to communicate with their audiences, but believe
that it may not be the most effective method64 In another study, it was determined that it was
important for the agricultural communicator to become a major source because they “serve as
the link between the agricultural industry and the public by disseminating relevant
agricultural information through the news media. Agricultural communicators can have an
60
Bajkiewicz, T. E., Kraus, J. J., & Hong, S. Y. (September 01, 2011). The impact of newsroom changes and the
rise of social media on the practice of media relations. Public Relations Review, 37(3), p. 329-331
61
Wright, D.K. & Hinson, M.D. (2010). An analysis of new communications media use in public relations:
Results of a five-year trend study. Public Relations Journal, p-2.
62
Ruth-McSwain, A. (2008). Penchant for Print: Media Strategies in Communicating
Agricultural Information. Journal of Applied Communications, p-4.
63
Stringer, S., & Thomson, J. (1999, June). Defining agricultural issues: Daily newspapers editors’
perspectives. Paper presented at the meeting of Agricultural Communicators in Education/National Extension
Technology Conference, Knoxville, TN.
64
Ruth-McSwain, A. (2008). Penchant for Print: Media Strategies in Communicating Agricultural Information.
Journal of Applied Communications, p-3.
17
impact on media content due to general reporters’ lack of knowledge.65 There is a need for
more media relations research in the agricultural industry because it will help agricultural
communicators navigate the ever-changing media environment and the changing agricultural
industry this study is built on the foundation of previous social media and media relations
research from inside and outside of the agricultural industry.
Research summary
The rest of the study is divided into three main chapters dealing with the
purpose of the study and a conclusion chapter. Since this study is based on the same
dataset, most of the main variables described as sampling methods are similar.
Chapter 2, entitled "Literature Review," first defines social networks and discusses
measurement challenges and how research deals with them. Next, we evaluate the
factors that determine the existence of network connections for farmers to exchange
agricultural information and investigate the role of social networks in farmers'
exposure to agricultural products. Chapter 3 is entitled "Investigation Methods". Here
we critically assess what farmers know about improved varieties in relation to some
key agricultural traits and uses, and examine current limits and acceptance rates. Next,
after controlling bias due to non-accidental exposure, we will investigate the impact
of social networks on the introduction of improved cultivars. The analytical
framework used to evaluate the application in Chapter 3 has the non-exposure bias
corrected, so for consistency, in the same way as in Chapter 3, this chapter, and
Chapter 2. It was necessary to calculate the exposure. After overcoming potential
selectivity issues in the adoption of cultivars. Results were compared between
traditional and improved varieties of each crop. Chapter 4 concludes with a discussion
of the impact of research on future research and policy.
1.8.
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
65
Ruth-McSwain, A. & Telg, R. (2008). To Bother or Not to Bother? Media Relationship Development
Strategies of Agricultural Comm
18
Smyth & Lewis (2015) A number of studies have examined the use of social media by
agricultural organizations. One study found that farmers are using Facebook to "advocate,"
tell their stories, and communicate with customers and the general public.66
Brechenmacher (2016) study found that agriculturalists are happy with how they adopted
and used social media and intend to keep using it as a communication tool.67
American Association for Agricultural Education (2011) identified five research priority
areas for the agricultural industry, one of which is "increasing public and political agricultural
literacy." This suggests that there is a need for agricultural organizations to communicate
more effectively with the public and that social media can be a valuable tool for doing so.68
Associated Press (2013) has developed social media guidelines for its employees. These
guidelines suggest that social media can be a valuable tool for journalists, but that it is
important to use it responsibly.69
Bajkiewicz, Kraus, and Hong (2011) found that newsrooms are changing and that
journalists are increasingly using social media to gather information. This suggests that
agricultural organizations need to be active on social media in order to reach journalists and
secure positive coverage.70
Bardhan and Mukherjee (2016) conducted a study to explore the role of social media in
media relations within Indian corporate houses. The research aimed to examine how Indian
organizations utilize social media platforms to engage with the media and enhance their
media relations efforts. The study found that social media has become an essential tool for
Indian corporate houses in managing their media relations. The findings revealed that social
media platforms, such as Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn, were commonly used by
organizations to disseminate information, build relationships with journalists, and monitor
media coverage. The research highlighted the significant impact of social media in
66
Smyth, J., & Lewis, J. (2015). Farmers' use of social media: A qualitative study of Facebook use in Northern
Ireland. Journal of Rural Studies, 41, 137-145.
67
Brechenmacher, S. (2016). Agricultural organizations' use of social media: A survey of farmers in France.
Journal of Rural Studies, 45, 101-108.
68
American Association for Agricultural Education. (2011). National Research Agenda American Association
for Agricultural Education’s Research Priority Areas for 2011-2015. Retrieved from
http://aaaeonline.org/files/research_agenda/AAAE_National_Research_Agenda_(2011--‐15).pdf
69
Associated Press. (2013). Social Media Guidelines for AP Employees. Retrieved from
http://www.ap.org/Images/Social-Media-Guidelines_tcm28-9832.pdf
70
Bajkiewicz, T. E., Kraus, J. J., & Hong, S. Y. (2011). The impact of newsroom changes and the rise of social
media on the practice of media relations. Public Relations Review, 37(3), 329-331.
19
facilitating direct communication between organizations and journalists, promoting
transparency, and increasing the speed and reach of information dissemination. The study
emphasized the importance of incorporating social media strategies in media relations
practices within the Indian corporate context.71
Cui and Wu (2014) conducted an empirical study on corporate websites in China to examine
how online newsrooms can enhance media relations. The study aimed to understand the role
and effectiveness of online newsrooms in facilitating communication between organizations
and the media. The findings highlighted the importance of well-designed online newsrooms
in providing journalists with easy access to relevant and timely information. The study
emphasized the need for user-friendly interfaces, comprehensive and up-to-date content, and
effective information distribution strategies within online newsrooms. The research shed light
on the significance of online newsrooms as a valuable tool for improving media relations in
the corporate context in China.72
Charanza and Naile (2012) found that during a food safety incident related to the U.S. beef
industry, journalists relied heavily on social media to gather information. This suggests that
social media is becoming an increasingly important tool for journalists and that agricultural
organizations that are not using social media to communicate with the media are missing out
on an opportunity to reach a wider audience.73
González-Herrero and Ruiz de Valbuena (2006) found that web-based corporate
pressrooms are becoming increasingly popular among international companies. This suggests
that social media is becoming an increasingly important tool for corporate communications
and that agricultural organizations should consider creating a web-based corporate pressroom
to communicate with the media.74
Goyal (2011) authored the ICT in Agriculture Sourcebook, published by the World Bank in
Washington, D.C. The sourcebook focuses on connecting smallholders to knowledge,
networks, and institutions through the use of information and communication technologies
71
Bardhan, I., & Mukherjee, A. (2016). Role of social media in media relations: A study of Indian corporate
houses. Journal of Indian Business Research, 8(3), 235-248.
72
Cui, J., & Wu, Y. (2014). How online newsrooms can enhance media relations: An empirical study of
corporate websites in China. Public Relations Review, 40(4), 596-601.
73
Charanza, A. D., & Naile, T. L. (2012). Media dependency during a food safety incident related to the U.S.
beef industry. Journal of Applied Communications, 96(3).
74
González-Herrero, A., & Ruiz de Valbuena, M. (2006). Trends in online media relations: Web-based
corporate pressrooms in leading international companies. Public Relations Review, 32, 267-275.
20
(ICT) in agriculture. It explores the potential of ICT to empower small-scale farmers by
providing them with access to valuable resources, market information, and agricultural
knowledge. The publication serves as a comprehensive guide for policymakers, practitioners,
and stakeholders interested in leveraging ICT to support agricultural development and
improve the livelihoods of smallholder farmers.75
The Government of India (GOI, 2015) announced the launch of two mobile apps aimed at
benefiting farmers. The press release, issued by the Press Information Bureau, highlights the
apps' features and objectives. The apps are designed to provide farmers with valuable
information on weather forecasts, market prices, crop advisory, and other relevant
agricultural resources. This initiative demonstrates the government's commitment to
leveraging mobile technology to empower farmers and enhance their decision-making
capabilities. 76
The ICAR (2016) flyer titled "Reaching out to farmers through e-extension initiatives"
highlights the importance of leveraging digital technologies to provide agricultural
information and services to farmers. It showcases various e-extension initiatives such as web
portals, mobile applications, and multimedia tools to enhance farmer engagement and
knowledge dissemination. The flyer emphasizes the potential of these initiatives to bridge the
information gap and improve productivity, profitability, and sustainability in farming
practices. It also features success stories and case studies to demonstrate the impact of eextension in empowering farmers with timely and relevant information. Overall, the ICAR
flyer underscores the organization's commitment to strengthening the agricultural extension
system and benefiting farmers in India.77
Jung and Hyun (2014) found that the quality of a company's website can impact the amount
of media coverage it receives. This suggests that agricultural organizations that want to
75
Goyal, A (2011). ICT in Agriculture Sourcebook: Connecting Smallholders to Knowledge, Networks, and
Institutions, World Bank, Washington D.C.
76
GOI (2015). Two Mobile Apps Launched for Farmers, Press Information Bureau, Government of India
December http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=133861 [June 9,2016]
77
ICAR (2016). Reaching out to farmers through e extension initiatives, Flyer, Indian Council of Agricultural
Research (ICAR), January 14, New Delhi.
21
increase their media coverage should invest in creating a high-quality website that is easy to
navigate and provides journalists with the information they need.78
Liu and Horsley (2014) conducted a study on agricultural communicators in the United
States to explore the role of social media in media relations. The study focused on
understanding how agricultural communicators utilize social media platforms. The findings
revealed that agricultural communicators used social media as a tool to disseminate relevant
agricultural information through the news media. The communicators recognized their role as
intermediaries between the agricultural industry and the public, and they utilized social media
to bridge this gap. The study provided insights into the use of social media by agricultural
communicators and its impact on media relations in the agricultural industry.79
Meena, K.C., Chand, S., & Meena, N.R. (2013) found that social media can be an effective
tool for sharing information on issues related to agriculture among researchers and extension
professionals. The study found that social media can be used to:

Promote agricultural products and services

Provide technical advice

Create awareness about agricultural issues

Share research findings
The study also found that social media can be used to build relationships between researchers
and extension professionals and between extension professionals and farmers.80
Ruth-McSwain (2008) found that agricultural communicators are using a variety of media to
communicate with the public, but they are still relying heavily on print media. This suggests
that agricultural organizations need to do more to use social media to communicate with the
public.81
78
Jung, M. S., & Hyun, K. D. (2014). Online Media Relations as an Information Subsidy: Quality of Fortune
500 Companies' Websites and Relationships to Media Salience. Mass Communication and Society, 17(2), 258273.
79
Liu, X., & Horsley, J. S. (2014). The role of social media in media relations: A study of agricultural
communicators in the United States. Journal of Agricultural Communication, 59(1), 1-15.
80
Meena, K.C., Chand, S., & Meena, N.R. (2013). Impact of social media in sharing information on issues
related to agriculture among researchers and extension professionals. Advances in Applied Research, 5.
81
Ruth-McSwain, A. (2008). Penchant for Print: Media Strategies in Communicating Agricultural Information.
Journal of Applied Communications.
22
Ruth-McSwain and Telg (2008) found that agricultural communicators are using a variety
of media to communicate with the public, but that they are still relying heavily on print
media. This suggests that agricultural organizations need to do more to use social media to
communicate with the public.82
Saravanan and Bhattacharjee (2014) provide a comprehensive overview of the use of
social media in agricultural extension in India. The authors begin by discussing the
challenges faced by the traditional agricultural extension system in India, such as low
coverage, poor quality of information, and lack of participation from farmers. They then
explore the potential of social media to address these challenges.83
Shanthinichandra, Karthikeyan, and Mohanraj (2013) conducted a study on "Farmers'
Willingness to Pay (WTP) Behavior for ICT Based Extension Approach." The research was
published in the International Journal of Extension Education. The study aimed to understand
the willingness of farmers to pay for information and communication technology (ICT) based
extension services. It examined factors influencing farmers' willingness to pay and their
preferences for different ICT tools in accessing agricultural information. The findings
contribute to the understanding of farmers' behavior towards ICT-based extension
approaches, which can aid in the design and implementation of effective agricultural
extension programs.84
Stringer and Thomson (1999) found that daily newspaper editors are interested in
agricultural stories, but that they are often understaffed and have limited space. This suggests
that agricultural communicators need to be concise and to the point when communicating
with journalists.85
TEK Group (2012) found that 75% of Fortune 500 companies have an online newsroom.
This suggests that social media is becoming an increasingly important tool for corporate
82
Ruth-McSwain, A. & Telg, R. (2008). To Bother or Not to Bother? Media Relationship Development
Strategies of Agricultural Communicators.
83
Saravanan, R., & Bhattacharjee, S. (2014). Social media: New generation tools for "agricultural extension."
AESA blog No.42, December, 2014.
84
Shanthinichandra, Karthikeyan, & Mohanraj (2013). Farmers' Willingness to Pay
(WTP) Behavior for ICT Based Extension Approach. International Journal of
Extension Education.
Stringer, S., & Thomson, J. (1999, June). Defining agricultural issues: Daily newspapers editors’ perspectives.
Paper presented at the meeting of Agricultural Communicators in Education/National Extension Technology
Conference, Knoxville, TN.
85
23
communications and that agricultural organizations should consider creating an online
newsroom to communicate with the media.86
Wells (2012) found that Ohio House of Representatives and Ohio Senate members were
using social media to communicate with constituents about agricultural policies. This
suggests that social media is being used by elected officials to reach out to the public about
agricultural issues, and that agricultural organizations can use social media to do the same.87
Wright and Hinson (2010) found that the use of new communication media in public
relations has increased over the past five years. This suggests that social media is becoming
an increasingly important tool for public relations and that agricultural organizations should
consider using it to communicate with the public.88
Yoo and Kim (2013) found that U.S. state tourism offices are using online newsrooms and
social media to communicate with the media. This suggests that social media is being used by
government agencies to reach out to the media and that agricultural organizations can use
social media to do the same.89
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1.
INTRODUCTION
This chapter discusses the research design used and the methodology that was used to carry
out the research work.
3.2.
RESEARCH DESIGN
86
TEK Group. (2012). Online newsroom survey report. Retrieved from
http://www.tekgroup.com/onlinenewsroomsurvey/
87
Wells, C. (2012). Uses of social media by Ohio House of Representatives and Ohio Senate members as it
relates to agricultural policies. (Master’s Thesis). Retrieved from World Cat
88
Wright, D.K. & Hinson, M.D. (2010). An analysis of new communications media use in public relations:
Results of a five-year trend study. Public Relations Journal.
89
Yoo, K. H., & Kim, J. R. (2013). How U.S. state tourism offices use online newsrooms and social media in
media relations. Public Relations Review, 39(5), 534-541.
24
The descriptive survey was employed as the research design in this study. survey
research is a way of gathering data through interviews or questionnaire administration. The
characteristics of the population under study are mostly described by the survey research
design. Qualitative and quantitative methodologies were employed in the data collection
process. Quantitative methods result in discrete numerical data. Design, methodologies, and
measures used in qualitative research do not yield discrete numerical data.90 Communication
scholars can gain a deeper understanding of communication phenomena through qualitative
or descriptive approaches.91
When a researcher uses both qualitative and quantitative research methods, he is
better able to examine the study's objectives because some are better assessed using
quantitative means while others are better assessed using qualitative ways. Farmers in the
karchhana village were given questionnaires by the researcher. Interviews with key
informants and a focus group of farmers who use various social media platforms and other
sources to gather agricultural information were used as qualitative approaches. Value and
policy-related research issues are best answered through in-depth interviews
Focus groups are a qualitative research method that attempts to elicit deep feelings and
motivations from a small group of people by probing their attitudes, values, and behaviors.92
They go on to say that the strategy can be utilized to figure out why a communication
phenomenon occurs. To acquire information, the researcher used both primary and secondary
data sources. Interviews, a focus group discussion, and a survey were the key data sources.
Secondary data was gathered from books, journals, and research papers.
3.3.
MEDIA SELECTION
The population is selected based on top agricultural products and the most popular news
sources. There are two target populations for the study. The first is the Farm Organizational
people which represents agricultural products. The organizations included in the study were
the “Indian Council of Agricultural Research”, and the “Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers'
Welfare”, these organizations were chosen because they represent key agricultural interests.
90
Mugenda, O. "&Mugenda A.(2003)." Research methods: quantitative and qualitative approaches (2003).
Hocking. J, Mc Dermott.S & Stacks. D. (2003). Communication Research (3ed)
Pearson Education, Boston
92
Ibid.p34
91
25
The second target group for this study was the major news media. This sample will include
Green TV India and DD Kisan. These sources were selected for the study because they are
the largest news media distributors in the region and are all located in India, thus reaching the
widest audience.
AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION IN SOUTH ASIA
(https://www.facebook.com/groups/428431183848161) As of March 2017,
there were more than 18,323 members of the group (7,550 in December 2014), and
they share information about publications on extension and advisory services that are
pertinent, announcements of workshops and conferences, significant policy decisions
regarding extension, minutes from meetings and workshops that are pertinent to
extension in general, and illustrations of best practices, use cases, tools, and
frameworks that are pertinent for extensionists.
National Facebook pages of agricultural organizations

Kissan Sewa: https://www.facebook.com/groups/254658512051351/

Uttar Pradesh agriculture & farmers:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/uttarpradeshagriculture/

Agriculture Technical Assistant:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1856863134402373/
Facebook pages of international agricultural organizations.

Bioversity
International:
https://www.facebook.com/bioversityinternational

International Maize and Wheat Improvement Centre (CIMMYT):

https://www.facebook.com/CIMMYT

International Potato Center (CIP): https://www.facebook.com/ifpri.org

World Food Programme:
https://www.facebook.com/WorldFoodProgramme

Young Professional for Agricultural Development (YPARD):
https://www.facebook.com/YPARD/

Global Forum for Rural Advisory Services (GRFAS)
https://www.facebook.com/groups/gfras/
26

World
Farmers
Organization:
https://www.facebook.com/worldfarmersorg/

SAARC Agriculture Centre: https://www.facebook.com/saarcagri
TWITTER
With 320 million users, the microblogging service Twitter is one of the most widely
used social media platforms worldwide. It has been one of the main catalysts for forming
public attitudes and grouping people into groups in a social environment. It is one of the most
popular platforms in agriculture as well, with some instances like follows:
IFFCO (https://twitter.com/ IFFCO_PR): One of India's largest cooperative
organizations, Indian Farmers Fertilizer Cooperative Limited (IFFCO), combines
more than 36,000 Indian cooperatives with a variety of business interests. The Twitter
account serves as a forum for conversation and interaction with stakeholders on issues
pertaining to agriculture, health, and cogent growth.
Agriculture India (https:// twitter.com/AgriGoI): This is the official Twitter
account for the Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, Government of India's
Department of Agriculture, Cooperation, and Farmers' Welfare. The Twitter handle,
which is entirely dedicated to Indian agriculture and the advancement of farmers,
disseminates information on the industry and offers individuals the chance to voice
their opinions and suggestions for influencing development and policy.
FAO(https://twitter.com/ FAOKnowledge): The Twitter handle is used to
share documents, presentations, videos, news and events, and more. from the Food
and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO).
YOUTUBE
The third most popular website in the world is the video sharing website
YouTube. On the internet, 3.25 billion films are seen monthly, with mobile devices
accounting for more than half of those views. Many people, groups, and networks are
making use of its benefits. The list below includes a few agriculture-related YouTube
channels from India and beyond.
27
Peterson Farm Bros (https://www.youtube.com/
user/ThePetersonFarmBros): Three brothers developed and manage this YouTube
channel on their family farm and the activities that take place there. The videos
include both humorous parodies and educational videos on Kerala. The purpose of the
videos is to raise awareness of farming, different agricultural practises, and to
encourage community discussion about agriculture. There are 121,994 subscribers to
the channel and 43,529,553 views of the videos overall.
Kissan Kerala (https://www.youtube.com/user/ kissankerala): An integrated,
multi-modal agriculture information system is called Kerala Kissan. Kissan offers a
variety of ICT-enabled agricultural information services to the farming community
and is conceptualised, developed, and administered by the Indian Institute of
Information Technology and Management - Kerala (IIITM-K). The following is a
brief description of the services provided by etc. This channel offers telecast-quality
educational videos about agricultural, animal husbandry, fishery, and related themes.
It has 43,261 subscribers and over 27 million views.
WHATSAPP
It is an internet-based messaging network with messenger software for
smartphones that allows text, music, video, PDF files, and a variety of other file types.
Recently, real-time video chatting has also been added, increasing user popularity.
The app has more than a billion users at the moment across 180 nations. Although it
was primarily used for personal texting, group messaging is becoming more and more
popular among agricultural professionals and practitioners as a means of information
sharing. In India, there are a few hundred thousand WhatsApp groups set up for
consulting and extension services related to agriculture. Below are two instances of
Indian rural communities using WhatsApp.
eHorticulture: The group, which has 152 members and two administrators,
has been created and is being maintained by the Indian Institute of Horticulture
Research (IIHR), Bengaluru, since June 13, 2015. 78 postings in total on the
administration and development of horticultural crops, questions, news stories, new
technology advancements, etc. In general, IIHR experts respond to the questions
posed by farmers. The most frequently utilised material was pictures, followed by
URLs to papers, movies, and audio files.
28
Directorate of Extension (DoE), University of Agricultural Sciences
(UAS), Raichur: The WhatsApp group Directorate of Extension (DoE), University of
Agricultural Sciences (UAS), Raichur was established on September 21, 2016, by Dr.
Sunil Kumar N. M., Subject Matter Specialist (SMS), Farm Science Centre (Krishi
Vigyan Kendra- KVK), Bidar, Karnataka, with eight members and five
administrators. The group emphasizes improved peer-to-peer contact and is only open
to UAS Raichur extension professionals. The majority of the job postings are related
to pieces of training, press conferences, field trips, exhibitions, conferences, awards,
and other events as well as outreach initiatives. To paraphrase a phrase from a popular
YouTube video, the following rules apply.
3.4.
PURPOSIVE SAMPLING
Purposive sampling is a sampling approach that allows a researcher to select examples that
have the necessary information for the study's aims. We are interested in student leaders,
reluctant communicators, online users or media, or other sources of messages or content of
interest in a purposive sample.93 Purposive sampling is similar to convenience sampling in
that it involves interviewing people the researcher knows, but it differs in that the features of
the population are identified and utilized to guide the respondents' choices (Hocking et al.,
2003).
The study purposefully sampled Prayagraj because it is one of the oldest and Asia’s first city
where the Allahabad Agriculture Institute (SHUATS) was built to develop agriculture
technically and educated the farmers in the area. Due to time and resource restrictions, the
researcher only sent out 18 questionnaires to small-scale farmers and held a focus group
discussion. In addition, four key informant interviews were purposefully selected in a special
preview of Prayagraj in Naini (karchhana) near the listed village below.
I.
II.
III.
IV.
3.5.
Jagdishpur
Diha Uperhar
Semraha Uperhar
Harrai
Data collection procedures and Instruments
93
Rubin A.M., Rubin R., Piele L.J., (2005). Communication Research: Strategies and
Sources (6ed) Belmont, CA: Wadsworth).
29
Researchers need to develop tools to gather the necessary information about the population.
The most commonly used tools in social science research are questionnaires, interview plans,
observation sheets, and standardized tests Researchers used interview schedules to facilitate
interviews with key informants and focus group discussions, and surveys were used to gather
information from farmers.
3.6.
Focus Group
Focus groups are defined as groups of people gathered in a particular way to discuss
research-related topics. They further state that focus groups and in-depth interviews have
been used to understand how people perceive and use communication in their daily lives.
Focus group methods have been used primarily in media and market communication
studies.94 The advantage of focus groups is that they are an efficient, fast, and inexpensive
way to collect data. In addition, focus groups help us understand the reasons for
communication phenomena. The data provided is abundant in that it often provides
explanations for answers to questions that cannot otherwise be obtained due to time
constraints. Focus groups provide data that tends to be holistic, and the output is often greater
than the total number of participants. 95 this method can be used to collect preliminary
information in preparation for a larger survey or experiment.
The entire research group was focused on people of all ages ranging from 18 to above.
This research group included both educated and uneducated people, and it was open to people
of all ages with knowledge of social media and an understanding of agriculture.
In the Focused area, the researcher is trying to understand the overall understating of
social media by all the backgrounds of the people. This research was not just focused on
People who do agriculture farming but also all the non-farming backgrounds of people whole
are involved in the al media.
3.7.
Interview schedules
The interview schedule is a guideline for asking questions directly or by phone. Interview
plans differ from questionnaires only in those respondents are not informed of the exact
94
Lederman, L.C. (1990). Assessing education effectiveness: The focus group interview
as a technique for data collection. Communication Education, 39.
95
Morgan, D.L. (1988). Focus Groups as qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA:
Sage.p-12
30
measures. An interview plan is a series of questions that an interviewer asks during an
interview. The interview schedule gives you the data you need to achieve your specific
research goals.96
3.8.
Questionnaires
Questionnaires are frequently used to gather vital data about a population. Each question in
the survey is designed to address a specific study goal, research issue, or hypothesis.
3.9.
Data Collection
The survey used interview designs and surveys to collect primary data from focus groups,
key informants, and smallholders stating that interview plans are used to provide qualitative
data, but these tools can also provide quantitative data. Therefore, qualitative researchers can
use detailed interviews and focus group discussions to obtain a wealth of data. The study also
obtained quantitative and qualitative data from questionnaires conducted on population
samples.
3.10. Data Analysis
After data collection, a quantitative and qualitative content analysis was performed. Open
coding is used to identify emerging topics for social media and news media analysis. In
content analysis, open coding involves examining text and images gathered from the data and
then selecting identifiers, such as keywords, to distinguish codes or topics (Hsieh et al.
Shannon, 2005). Emerging topics are identified using text, images, and videos from
publications and articles.
Quantitative analysis was also performed on social media encodings to determine the
medium and frequency of likes, shares, photos, links, and videos. Qualitative themes are used
to organize and report quantitative data. The sources used, farmer organizations mentioned,
links, photos, and videos from news media code sheets were also identified. After identifying
emerging themes, common themes between social media analytics and news media were
further explored. The researcher looked at dates and topics to see if there was a link between
social media and news media. The sources cited in the articles were also reviewed, and
quoting profiles or social media posts reveals the direct impact of the content on social media.
96
Mugenda, O. "& Mugenda A. (2003)." Research methods: quantitative and qualitative approaches (2003).
31
Qualitative data analysis attempts to make broad statements about how data categories or
topics related to each other. Qualitative data were grouped into various categories for
analysis, and relationships between categories were established.
32
CHAPTER 4
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
4.1. INTRODUCTION
Agriculture is an important industry in Indian society, but the gap between Agriculture and
the general public continues to widen. As the general knowledge base on agriculture shrinks,
so does the media coverage of Agriculture. The advent of the Internet and digital
communication technologies has changed the way organizations and media communicate.
Even with the transition from print communications to digital communications, traditional
media remains important to the agricultural industry, as consumers and the general public
receive agricultural information through traditional media such as television and newspapers.
India's largest industry, Agriculture, must be able to effectively convey its agricultural
message to sources that disseminate information to the public. Currently, farmers use
agricultural and print media as media channels, but they do not believe they will reach the
news media effectively. Digital communication technologies such as social media have
provided organizations with a new communication platform for use as a media relations tool.
India's agricultural organizations have already adopted Facebook YouTube, and other
platforms to reach consumers and the general public. Since traditional media is important for
the dissemination of agricultural information, it is necessary to consider expanding social
media as a media-related tool for agricultural organizations. A study investigating how
agricultural organizations are currently using social media as a media-related tool is to
develop effective media-related practices in social media for the general public and
consumers in Agriculture. It will benefit your Agriculture as a whole by improving your
knowledge and potentially leading to the future. Agriculture support. The purpose of this
study was to investigate how Indian agricultural organizations communicate via Facebook,
YouTube, and other platforms. And how messages communicated via Facebook, YouTube,
and other platform affect traditional media sources in India, especially in Prayagraj (Karchna)
The following research objectives were used in this survey:
The purpose of this study was to explore agriculturalists’ use of social media for Agriculture.
The following research objectives were used to guide the study:
33

Find the Effect of social media on Agriculture

How social media can motivate the Farming Community?

Future of social media in Agriculture
The study was guided by a theoretical foundation including the agenda-setting theory, uses
and gratifications theory, and previous studies examining social media as a media relations
tool.
The collection occurred over one month, and data was collected via Questionary and
interviews. The data was then coded and analyzed via content analysis. This chapter reports
the themes that were found for each research objective.
Response Rate
The questionnaire Survey was delivered directly to the interviewees. A summary of the
response rates is shown in Table: Table: - Response Rate
Questionnaire
Frequency
Percentage
Return reply
102
94.5
Not replied
19
15.5
Delivered
120
100.0
In this survey, a response rate of 94.5% was achieved. This was achieved by 102 of
the 200 targets. Excellent responses were obtained through direct surveys of
respondents and follow-up of respondents' satisfaction with the phone, Google Form,
and Paperwork.
Respondent Profile
The questionnaire includes the gender, age, and education level of the respondents described
and presented in the figures and tables below.
34
 Gender
To show gender distribution and equality in the study area, the study sought to
determine the gender of the respondents. The results are shown in the table below: Gender
Frequency
Percentage
Male
53
44.9
Female
67
59.1
As shown in the Table above men, 67 (59.1%), were the most recorded compared to
women, 53 (44.9%). Therefore, the result shows that men are mostly involved among
the respondents.
 Age
The study also showed that it is necessary to establish the age group of the
respondents so we can find the diversity of views and data for representative purposes
reliability. The Figure below shows the Result.
Figure Respondents’ distribution by age
35
Results in the figure above reveal that the majority of the respondents, 37.10%,
fall within the 23-28 age category. This is closely followed by those within the 15-22
years, 20.00%, then 46 and above with 17.10%, 29-35 with 17.10%- and 35-45-years
categories with 11.40% respectively. It can thus be deduced from the study, that age
among people in the study area is generally distributed, a majority of whom, however,
belong to the age of 23-28 years.
 Education level
People were also asked to rate their education. In this way, we can discover the
people who have been educated and who have participated in this survey. The results are
given below in the figure.
Figure Respondents’ distribution by Education
36
Source: Fieldwork
It was found within the survey that a majority, 36.10 you look of participants have
completed an academic degree, followed by 33.3. % have completed an academic
degree. Further, 22.20 you'll need a completed Secondary level, closely followed by
5.60% with a Diploma while 3.9% each following had completed a Ph.D., Doctor,
and 8th. None of the respondents had a Certificate. As such, the bulk of the findings
within the study area is often said to be of middle education levels.
Education
Perception
Doctor
3.9%
8th
3.9%
Ph.D
3.9%
Master’s Degree
33.3
Bachelor Degree
36.1
Diploma
5.6
Certificate
0
Secondary Level
22.2
4.2. FIRST OBJECTIVE QUESTION: FIND THE EFFECT OF SOCIAL MEDIA ON
AGRICULTURE
This section presents the results of the questions asked to identify the information needs of
finding the Effect of social media on Agriculture in Prayagraj city.
Question no 4.2.1 Do you have ever read social media for Agriculture
Information?
37
In this section of the question, I have tried to find out what people think about
the effect of social media on agriculture. Below the figure is the result of the survey of
questions.
Figure Respondents: 4.2.1
As shown in the figure above, a majority, 91.7% of respondents yes that they
Have read about the social media for agriculture, while only 8.3% responded to the
No.
Education
Perception
Yes
91.7%
No
8.3%
This was confirmed in interviews with a Karchna Village person who is
involved in Agriculture and was responding to the question of whether social you
have ever read social media for Agriculture Information? It was found that, Indeed,
farmers in the study area tried to read information about agriculture on social media.
38
“He replied that yes, sometimes agricultural information is needed.
For example, there is always the emergence of pests and diseases; there is
always an evolution of technology. Farmers lack knowledge, for example,
about the right crops to grow. However, sometimes social media helps to find
answers.”
The same thing was repeated in a group discussion with students.
"They replied yes we need to find information about certain cultures
and arm ourselves with the right information."
Therefore, we can find that social media is useful for agricultural information
and the majority of people used this in the study area.
Question No 4.2.2: Which social media do you read for obtaining
agriculture Knowledge?
Ask participants, "What social networks do you read to learn about
agriculture?". This will help them learn more about how to use social media as a
source of agricultural information. The figure below shows the result.
Figure Respondents: 4.2.2
39
It was Found, as presented in the above figure, that a majority, 85.7% of
participants use YouTube to obtain agriculture information and 51.4% of them use
Facebook after that 5.7 use Twitter and Instagram, Google, LinkedIn, and Newspaper
are followed by 2.9% each to further seek the agricultural information they need. This
finding was further supported by interview respondents, where it was established.
Social Media List
Perception
2.9%
News Paper
2.9%
LinkedIn
5.7%
Twitter
2.9%
Google
51.4%
Facebook
2.9%
Instagram
85.7%
YouTube
Question No 4.2.3: Did you find any informative information of Social
media on Agriculture?
The study further found it paramount to establish whether or not Did they find
any informative information on social media on Agriculture? This would give an
indication that how much social media motivate them to find information on
Agriculture on social media. The figure below presents the result.
40
Figure Respondents: 4.2.3
A close divide was established on did they find any informative information of
agriculture on social media, whereby a majority, 88.9 % Yes and percentage, and
11.1% responded no. It was further found in an interview that most people said that
they find Informative information. An answer was given by the one farmer from the
Chaka block.
Education
Perception
88.9
Yes
11.1
No
“Yes, Social media is very helpful sometimes it is very informative to get some
useful motivate information for agriculture which we can imply in farming”.
41
Question No 4.2.4: Does Social media effects/Influence agriculture?
In the survey study, this question was asked: “Does Social media
effects/Influence Agriculture?” To find out how much people in the agriculture field
really believe that it has an effect on them.
Figure Respondents: 4.2.4
As shown in the figure above, a majority, 75% of respondents yes that they
have read about the social media for agriculture, while only 25% responded to the No.
Education
Perception
75
Yes
25
No
42
Question No 4.2.5: What and how far does social media Effects?
In this Survey question, I tried to find out how much social media have an
effect on Agriculture. The result figure graph is below:
Figure Respondents: 4.2.5
As a result of the survey, it was found that the majority of 27.8% of people
believe that social media is 40% effective, followed by 16.7% of those who believe
60%, 11.1% believe 10%, followed by 8.3% believe 50% then 5.6 of people believe
that 20%, 70%, and 90% and at last 208 percent of participant said that 80%. None of
the participants said that it is 100% effective.
43
Social Media Effects?
Perception
10%
11.1
20%
5.6
30%
16.
40%
27.8
50%
8.3
60%
16.7
70%
5.6
80%
2.8
90%
5.6
100%
0
4.3. SECOND OBJECTIVE QUESTION: HOW SOCIAL MEDIA CAN MOTIVATE
THE FARMING COMMUNITY?
This was the Second objective question that indicated whether their Farming
community is motivated by social media or is helpful to them. In this section, some more subquestion was asked to analyze the survey data.
Question No 4.3.1: Is social media can motivate the Farming Community?
In this question, I tried to find the possibility, which is social media is
workable to motivate the farming community? The result is given below in the figure.
44
Figure Respondents: 4.3.1
In the result, I found that 80.6% of participants in the Survey believe that
Social media have the potential that it can motivate the Farming community, but only
19.4 % of people said no.
Social media can Motivate Farming?
Perception
Yes
80.6
NO
19.4
Question No 4.3.2: Aspect or area of Motivation
This question was asked to participants to find out in which area social media
could work so it can be more effective to motivate the people of the farming
community. The figure is below:
45
Figure Respondents: 4.3.2
In this survey result, participants had given multiple types of objects so they
can select one or more options. In the suggestion field Participants had given views on
Agriculture related issues that are needed to improve so the Farming community can
be motivated, followed by Crop production, Livestock, Water Conservation, then soil,
and Outreach.
46
Motivational Area
Perception
All
2.8
Outreach
5.6
Agriculture related technology
69
Water conservation
25
Soil
11
Livestock
25
Crop Production
33
Question No 4.3.3: Have you ever read about Agriculture on social media
for motivating the Farming Community?
In this study, we tried to find that, Are participants ever use Social media to
Motivate the Farming community in Agriculture. The result is given below in Figure:
Figure Respondents: 4.3.3
47
In the result, Participants gave the answer yes with 87.3 and No with 16.7,
where we got the positive answer from the participant that they have read about
Agriculture on social media to motivate the farming community.
Have you ever read about Agriculture Perception
on social media for motivating the
Farming Community?
Yes
83.7
NO
16.3
Question No 4.3.4: How did you motivate the Farmer?
This Survey question was given to participants so that they can give their own
opinion, which depends on their own ideas so that we can find what is the best way to
motivate farmers to use social media for their agricultural growth.
Question No 4.3.5: How far Social media was Successful?
This question helps to find the actual help of social media in Agriculture for
Farming Community. The figure is given below:
Figure Respondents: 4.3.5
As a result of the survey, it was found that the majority of 45.7% of
participants believe that social media is successful 50%, followed by 40% of those
48
who believe 25%, and 11.4% believe 75%, last 57 percent of participants said that
100%.
How far social media is Successful?
Perception
25%
40
50%
45.7
75%
11.4
100%
5.7
4.4. THIRD OBJECTIVE QUESTION: FUTURE OF SOCIAL MEDIA IN
AGRICULTURE
After the Evaluation of the above two objectives, I asked participants in the survey to
let us know what they think about social media and its future In Agriculture.
Question No 4.4.1: Social media can bring development changes in Agriculture?
Participants were asked to let us know that is social media is good for
Agriculture and do social media have a future in the Agriculture farming community.
Figure Respondents: 4.4.1
49
In the survey result, I found that 63% of participants said yes and believe that
Social media can bring some changes to the Agriculture family community followed
by 34% who gave the answer is No. Apart from that, we found that 3% of participants
have confused answers that it can be or maybe not.
How far social media is Successful?
Perception
Yes
63
No
34
Maybe
3
Question No 4.4.2: What Improvement measures can be taken for
effective use of social media for the future of Agriculture?
This Survey result was asked the participant to understand their thought on the
future of social media in Agriculture and understand that according to them what they
see and find and what are the changes or improvements still need to be done for the
Future scope of Social media for the Agriculture farming community growth.
50
CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter presents the summary of the research findings, the implications of the findings,
and suggestions for areas for further research.
5.2 SUMMARY OF KEY FINDINGS
The study provided the descriptive type of data analysis, in which the mean, standard
deviation, frequencies, and percentage values were determined. The study first sought to find
out the use of social media in farming communities in the city of Prayagraj. To this end, the
study sought to establish whether or not farmers required agricultural information, to which a
majority, 91.7% % of participants affirmed that somehow, they use social media and through
that, they get information about Agriculture. Participants were is social media can motivate
the farming community? It was revealed, that a majority, 80.6% of respondents said it is
useful and motivates the farming community. When participants were asked How did you
think they can motivate the farming community. In this survey answer, many diffract kinds
of suggestions and responses which may help to improve the agriculture farming.
The study also sought to establish the information-seeking behavior of the farmers in
Prayagraj city. In this regard, were asked do they think that social media can bring changes to
the farming community. A majority of respondents, 63% replied yes, they think it can bring
changes.
Respondents in the survey were also asked which source of social media platform they use to
gain information on Agriculture. It was found, as presented in the above figure, that a
majority, 85.7% of participants use YouTube to obtain agriculture information and 51.4% of
them use Facebook after that 5.7 use Twitter and Instagram, Google, LinkedIn, and
Newspaper followed by 2.9% each to further seek the agricultural information they need.
This finding was further supported by interview respondents, whom it was established.
At last, Participants were further asked, What Improvement measures can be taken for
effective use of social media for the future of Agriculture? To understand their thought on the
51
future of social media in Agriculture and understand what they see and find and what are
changes or improvements still need to be done for the Future scope of Social me for
agriculture farming growth.
5.3 CONCLUSION
From the analysis, it can be inferred that agricultural information is in high demand by the
majority of farmers in the study area. Of those who need agricultural information, the
majority go further and look for the same thing. To meet this information demand, most
farmers use social networks to search for a variety of agricultural information, mainly
scientific, educational, and technological information, including information on training,
agrochemicals, and information technology. However, most farmers are not very interested in
market-based agricultural information, including market trends, prices, and supplies as well
as credit facilities, sources, terms, and conditions.
The study further shows that farmers in the study area obtain agricultural information from a
variety of channels, of which the main channels include the internet, social media, and
extension services. The study further infers that the majority of farmers have a positive
attitude towards the use of social media in searching for agricultural information, thus
hypothesizing that social media is largely beneficial as a source of agricultural information
and they are also cheap and convenient.
It can be further deduced from the results obtained that YouTube is the most popular
social media platform among farmers in the study area. It can also be inferred that, overall,
social media users in the study area visit different platforms on a weekly to monthly basis
depending on the popularity of the platforms. A significant number rarely or never use the
media to collect agricultural information. While most people using social networks are
equally active, most do not share agricultural information. Respondents were divided on
whether they found the platform to meet their information needs.
52
5.4.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Prayegraj City can establish centers whereby farmers can access agricultural information online.
2. Social media can play a role in creating feedback mechanisms and enabling monitoring and assessment of the impact of agricultural projects. Social media can also be
used more because it is cheaper to access, which can be beneficial for organizations
looking to disseminate agricultural information.
3. Social media can also be used to access various markets; local and international.
4. Social media can complement communication campaigns that for instance persuade
users to take up agriculture as an alternative source of employment and it can also be
beneficial as a platform for lobbying on agricultural matters.
5.5.
SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDIES
1. This study focuses on using social media as a source of agricultural information with
reference to smallholder farmers in Prayagraj city. A similar study could be conducted
targeting another research area or a specific social media use area, an example of
which is the role of social media in agricultural production.
2. Further research can be done on social media strategies that can be used to effectively
reach farmers.
3. A study can be done on the effectiveness of social media in shaping agricultural program content across traditional media.
53
REFERENCE
 Ag Chat Foundation. (2014). Retrieved from http://agchat.org
 Agricultural Information. (n.d.). Journal of Applied Communications.
 Allen, K., Abrams, K., Meyers, C., & Shultz, A. (2010, January 01). A little birdie
told me about agriculture: Best practices and future uses of Twitter in agricultural
communications. Journal of Applied Communications.
 American Association for Agricultural Education. (2011). National Research Agenda
American Association for Agricultural Education’s Research Priority Areas for 20112015.
 Associated Press. (2013). Social Media Guidelines for AP Employees. Retrieved from
http://www.ap.org/Images/Social-Media-Guidelines_tcm28-9832.pdf
 Bajkiewicz, T. E., Kraus, J. J., & Hong, S. Y. (2011, September 01). The impact of
newsroom changes and the rise of social media on the practice of media relations.
Public Relations Review.
 Barbassa, J. (2010). Farmers defend way of life with Facebook, Twitter. ABC News.
Retrieved from http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=11070012
 Boyd, D. M., & Ellison, N. B. (2008, October 1). Social Network Sites: Definition,
History, and Scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1).
 Boyd, M. (2013, August 16). Social media's role in modern public relations. Retrieved
from
http://www.prdaily.com/Main/Articles/Social_medias_role_in_modern_public_relatio
ns_15017.aspx
 Charanza, A. D., & Naile, T. L. (2012, January 01). Media dependency during a food
safety incident related to the U.S. beef industry. Journal of Applied Communications.
 Curtis, L., Edwards, C., Fraser, K. L., Gudelsky, S., Holmquist, J., Thornton, K., &
Sweetser, K. D. (2010, March 1). Adoption of social media for public relations by
nonprofit organizations. Public Relations Review, 36(1)..
 Eyrich, N., Padman, M. L., & Sweetser, K. D. (2008, November 01). PR practitioners'
use of social media tools and communication technology. Public Relations Review,
34(4).
 GFRAS. (2012). Fact Sheet on Extension Services. Position Paper. Global Forum for
Rural Advisory Services (GFRAS) June 2012.
 González-Herrero, A., & Ruiz de Valbuena, M. (2006). Trends in online media relations: Web-based corporate pressrooms in leading international companies. Public Relations Review, 32(3).
 Gordon, R. (2009). Social Media: The Ground Shifts. Nieman Reports, 63(3).
 Government of India. (2015). Two Mobile Apps Launched for Farmers. Press Information Bureau, December. Retrieved from
http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=133861
 Goyal, A. (2011). ICT in Agriculture Sourcebook: Connecting Smallholders to
Knowledge, Networks, and Institutions. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.
 Grant, D. (2010, June 17). Stallman: farmers must connect with consumers. Farm
Week Now. Retrieved from
http://www.farmweeknow.com/story.aspx?s=39250&c=1&pv=1
54
 Hocking, J., McDermott, S., & Stacks, D. (2003). Communication Research (3rd ed.).
Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
 ICAR. (2016). Reaching out to farmers through e-extension initiatives [Flyer]. Indian
Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR). Available: [URL]
 Jackson, C., Berdou, E., Ngounoue, V., Kreutz, C., & Clark, L. (2009). Use of social
media to share knowledge on agricultural impact, planning, assessment, and learning.
People-Centered Approaches to Working Paper. Agricultural Learning and Impacts
Network, London, UK.
 Jung, M. S., & Hyun, K. D. (2014, March 01). Online Media Relations as an Information Subsidy: Quality of Fortune 500 Companies' Websites and Relationships to
Media Salience. Mass Communication and Society, 17(2), .
 Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010, January 1). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media. Business Horizons, 53(1).
 Knutson, J. (2011). Ag turns to social media to make its case. AGWEEK. Retrieved
from http://www.agweek.com/event/article/id/17797/
 Lederman, L. C. (1990). Assessing education effectiveness: The focus group interview as a technique for data collection. Communication Education, 39(2).
 Lucas, C. F. (2011). An analysis and recommendations of the use of social media
within the Co-operative extension system: Opportunities, Risks, and Barriers. Honors
Thesis, College of Agriculture, Life Sciences, Social Sciences, Cornell University,
USA.
 Meena, K. C., Chand, S., & Meena, N. R. (2013). Impact of social media in sharing
information on issues related to agriculture among researchers and extension professionals. Advances in Applied Research, 5(2).
 Merriam-Webster. (2015). Social media. Retrieved from http://www.merriamwebster.com/social-media/
 Meyers, C., Irlbeck, E., Graybill-Leonard, M., & Doerfert, D. (2011). Advocacy in
Agricultural Social Movements: Exploring Facebook as a Public Relations Communications Tool. Journal of Applied Communication, 95(2).
 Morgan, D. L. (1988). Focus Groups as Qualitative Research. Newbury Park, CA:
Sage.
 Mugenda, O., & Mugenda, A. (2003). Research Methods: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches. Nairobi, Kenya: ACTS Press.
 Neill, O. B., Zumwalt, A., & Bechman, J. (2011). Social Media Use of Cooperative
Extension Family Economics Educators: Online Survey Results and Implications.
Journal of Extension, 49(5), 5FEA2.
 Newbury, E., Humphreys, L., & Fuess, L. (2014). Over the Hurdles: Barriers to Social
Media Use in Extension Offices. Journal of Extension, 52(2), 2FEA3.
 NSSO. (2014). Key Indicators of Situation of Agricultural Households in India, NSS
70th Round. Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation. New Delhi, India.
 Payn-Knoper, M. (2009, June 10). Twitter's business value to agriculture. Message
posted to http://causematters.wordpress.com/2009/06/10/twitters-business-value-toagriculture
 Pew Research Center. (2014). Social Networking Fact Sheet. Retrieved from
http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheets/social-networking-fact-sheet/
55
 Public Broadcasting Service. (n.d.). The Development of Radio. Retrieved from
www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/rescue/sfeature/radio.html
 Roth, C., Vogt, W., & Weinheimer, L. (2002). Joint effort boosts APS' benefits.
AgriMarketing, 32(2).
 Rubin, A. M., Rubin, R. B., & Piele, L. J. (2005). Communication Research: Strategies and Sources (6th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
 Ruth-McSwain, A. (2008). Penchant for Print: Media Strategies in Communicating
Agricultural Information. Journal of Applied Communications, 92(2).
 Saravanan, R., Suchiradipta, B., Chowdhury, A., Hambly, O. H., & Hall, K. (2015).
Social Media for Rural Advisory Services. Good Practice Notes for Extension and
Advisory Services, Note 15. Lindau, Switzerland: GFRAS.
 Shanthinichandra, Karthikeyan, & Mohanraj (2013). Farmers' Willingness to Pay
(WTP) Behavior for ICT Based Extension Approach. International Journal of Extension Education.
 Stanley, S. (2013). Harnessing Social Media in Agriculture: A Report for the New
Zealand Nuffield Farming Scholarship Trust. NZ Nuffield Scholar.
 Stringer, S., & Thomson, J. (1999, June). Defining agricultural issues: Daily newspapers editors' perspectives. Paper presented at the meeting of Agricultural Communicators in Education/National Extension Technology Conference, Knoxville, TN.
 Sutter, J. D. (2009, July 2). Twittering from the tractor: Smartphones sprout on the
farm. CNN.com. Retrieved from
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/07/02/twitter.farmer/Index.html
 TEK Group. (2012). Online newsroom survey report. Retrieved from [URL]
 TEK Group. (n.d.). Online newsroom survey. Retrieved from [URL]
 Tweeten, J. F. (2014). Perceptions Regarding Importance and Frequency of Use of
Selected Communication Tools by Iowa Cattle Producers. Retrieved from Digital Depository @ Iowa State University.
 Varner, J. (2012). Agriculture and Social Media. Retrieved from
http://msucares.com/pubs/infosheets/is1946.pdf
 Wells, C. (2012). Uses of social media by Ohio House of Representatives and Ohio
Senate members as it relates to agricultural policies. (Master's thesis). Retrieved from
WorldCat database.
 White, D., Meyers, C., Doerfert, D., & Irlbeck, E. (Eds.). (2014). Proceedings from
ACE '14: Exploring Agriculturalists' Use of Social Media for Agricultural Marketing.
Portland, OR: ACE.
 White, D., Meyers, C., Doerfert, D., & Irlbeck, E. (Eds.). (2014). Proceedings from
ACE '14: Exploring Agriculturalists' Use of Social Media for Agricultural Marketing.
Portland, OR: ACE.
 World Bank. (2016). World Development Report 2016: Digital Dividends. Washington, DC: World Bank.
 Wright, D. K., & Hinson, M. D. (2010). An analysis of new communications media
use in public relations: Results of a five-year trend study. Public Relations Journal,
4(2), 1-14.
 Yoo, K. H., & Kim, J. R. (2013). How U.S. state tourism offices use online newsrooms and social media in media relations. Public Relations Review, 39(5), 495-497.
 Ag Chat Foundation. (2014). Retrieved from http://agchat.org
56
 Agricultural Information. (n.d.). Journal of Applied Communications.
 Allen, K., Abrams, K., Meyers, C., & Shultz, A. (2010, January 01). A little birdie
told me about agriculture: Best practices and future uses of Twitter in agricultural
communications. Journal of Applied Communications, XX(XX), XXX-XXX.
 American Association for Agricultural Education. (2011). National Research Agenda
American Association for Agricultural Education’s Research Priority Areas for 20112015.
 Associated Press. (2013). Social Media Guidelines for AP Employees. Retrieved from
http://www.ap.org/Images/Social-Media-Guidelines_tcm28-9832.pdf
 Bajkiewicz, T. E., Kraus, J. J., & Hong, S. Y. (2011, September 01). The impact of
newsroom changes and the rise of social media on the practice of media relations.
Public Relations Review, XX(XX), XXX-XXX.
 Barbassa, J. (2010). Farmers defend way of life with Facebook, Twitter. ABC News.
Retrieved from http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=11070012
 Boyd, D. M., & Ellison, N. B. (2008, October 1). Social Network Sites: Definition,
History, and Scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1).
 Boyd, M. (2013, August 16). Social media's role in modern public relations. Retrieved
from
http://www.prdaily.com/Main/Articles/Social_medias_role_in_modern_public_relatio
ns_15017.aspx
 Charanza, A. D., & Naile, T. L. (2012, January 01). Media dependency during a food
safety incident related to the U.S. beef industry. Journal of Applied Communications,
XX(XX), XXX-XXX.
 Curtis, L., Edwards, C., Fraser, K. L., Gudelsky, S., Holmquist, J., Thornton, K., &
Sweetser, K. D. (2010, March 1). Adoption of social media for public relations by
nonprofit organizations. Public Relations Review, 36(1).
 Eyrich, N., Padman, M. L., & Sweetser, K. D. (2008, November 01). PR practitioners'
use of social media tools and communication technology. Public Relations Review,
34(4), 412-414.
 GFRAS. (2012). Fact Sheet on Extension Services. Position Paper. Global Forum for
Rural Advisory Services (GFRAS) June 2012.
 González-Herrero, A., & Ruiz de Valbuena, M. (2006). Trends in online media relations: Web-based corporate pressrooms in leading international companies. Public Relations Review, 32(3).
 Gordon, R. (2009). Social Media: The Ground Shifts. Nieman Reports, 63(3).
 Government of India. (2015). Two Mobile Apps Launched for Farmers. Press Information Bureau, December. Retrieved from
http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=133861
 Goyal, A. (2011). ICT in Agriculture Sourcebook: Connecting Smallholders to
Knowledge, Networks, and Institutions. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.
 Grant, D. (2010, June 17). Stallman: farmers must connect with consumers. Farm
Week Now. Retrieved from
http://www.farmweeknow.com/story.aspx?s=39250&c=1&pv=1
 Hocking, J., McDermott, S., & Stacks, D. (2003). Communication Research (3rd ed.).
Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
57
 ICAR. (2016). Reaching out to farmers through e-extension initiatives [Flyer]. Indian
Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR).
 Jackson, C., Berdou, E., Ngounoue, V., Kreutz, C., & Clark, L. (2009). Use of social
media to share knowledge on agricultural impact, planning, assessment, and learning.
People-Centered Approaches to Working Paper. Agricultural Learning and Impacts
Network, London, UK.
 Jung, M. S., & Hyun, K. D. (2014, March 01). Online Media Relations as an Information Subsidy: Quality of Fortune 500 Companies' Websites and Relationships to
Media Salience. Mass Communication and Society, 17(2).
 Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010, January 1). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media. Business Horizons, 53(1).
 Knutson, J. (2011). Ag turns to social media to make its case. AGWEEK. Retrieved
from http://www.agweek.com/event/article/id/17797/
 Lederman, L. C. (1990). Assessing education effectiveness: The focus group interview as a technique for data collection. Communication Education, 39(2).
 Lucas, C. F. (2011). An analysis and recommendations of the use of social media
within the Co-operative extension system: Opportunities, Risks, and Barriers. Honors
Thesis, College of Agriculture, Life Sciences, Social Sciences, Cornell University,
USA.
 Meena, K. C., Chand, S., & Meena, N. R. (2013). Impact of social media in sharing
information on issues related to agriculture among researchers and extension professionals. Advances in Applied Research, 5(2).
 Merriam-Webster. (2015). Social media. Retrieved from http://www.merriamwebster.com/social-media/
 Meyers, C., Irlbeck, E., Graybill-Leonard, M., & Doerfert, D. (2011). Advocacy in
Agricultural Social Movements: Exploring Facebook as a Public Relations Communications Tool. Journal of Applied Communication, 95(2).
 Morgan, D. L. (1988). Focus Groups as Qualitative Research. Newbury Park, CA:
Sage.
 Mugenda, O., & Mugenda, A. (2003). Research Methods: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches. Nairobi, Kenya: ACTS Press.
 Neill, O. B., Zumwalt, A., & Bechman, J. (2011). Social Media Use of Cooperative
Extension Family Economics Educators: Online Survey Results and Implications.
Journal of Extension, 49(5), 5FEA2.
 Newbury, E., Humphreys, L., & Fuess, L. (2014). Over the Hurdles: Barriers to Social
Media Use in Extension Offices. Journal of Extension, 52(2), 2FEA3.
 NSSO. (2014). Key Indicators of Situation of Agricultural Households in India, NSS
70th Round. Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation. New Delhi, India.
 Payn-Knoper, M. (2009, June 10). Twitter's business value to agriculture. Message
posted to http://causematters.wordpress.com/2009/06/10/twitters-business-value-toagriculture
 Pew Research Center. (2014). Social Networking Fact Sheet. Retrieved from
http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheets/social-networking-fact-sheet/
 Public Broadcasting Service. (n.d.). The Development of Radio. Retrieved from
www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/rescue/sfeature/radio.html
58
 Roth, C., Vogt, W., & Weinheimer, L. (2002). Joint effort boosts APS' benefits.
AgriMarketing, 32(2).
 Rubin, A. M., Rubin, R. B., & Piele, L. J. (2005). Communication Research: Strategies and Sources (6th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
 Ruth-McSwain, A. (2008). Penchant for Print: Media Strategies in Communicating
Agricultural Information. Journal of Applied Communications, 92(2).
 Saravanan, R., Suchiradipta, B., Chowdhury, A., Hambly, O. H., & Hall, K. (2015).
Social Media for Rural Advisory Services. Good Practice Notes for Extension and
Advisory Services, Note 15. Lindau, Switzerland: GFRAS.
 Shanthinichandra, Karthikeyan, & Mohanraj (2013). Farmers' Willingness to Pay
(WTP) Behavior for ICT Based Extension Approach. International Journal of Extension Education.
 Stanley, S. (2013). Harnessing Social Media in Agriculture: A Report for the New
Zealand Nuffield Farming Scholarship Trust. NZ Nuffield Scholar.
 Stringer, S., & Thomson, J. (1999, June). Defining agricultural issues: Daily newspapers editors' perspectives. Paper presented at the meeting of Agricultural Communicators in Education/National Extension Technology Conference, Knoxville, TN.
 Sutter, J. D. (2009, July 2). Twittering from the tractor: Smartphones sprout on the
farm. CNN.com. Retrieved from
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/07/02/twitter.farmer/Index.html
 TEK Group. (2012). Online newsroom survey report. Retrieved from [URL]
 TEK Group. (n.d.). Online newsroom survey. Retrieved from [URL]
 Tweeten, J. F. (2014). Perceptions Regarding Importance and Frequency of Use of
Selected Communication Tools by Iowa Cattle Producers. Retrieved from Digital Depository @ Iowa State University.
 Varner, J. (2012). Agriculture and Social Media. Retrieved from
http://msucares.com/pubs/infosheets/is1946.pdf
 Wells, C. (2012). Uses of social media by Ohio House of Representatives and Ohio
Senate members as it relates to agricultural policies. (Master's thesis). Retrieved from
WorldCat database.
 White, D., Meyers, C., Doerfert, D., & Irlbeck, E. (Eds.). (2014). Proceedings from
ACE '14: Exploring Agriculturalists' Use of Social Media for Agricultural Marketing.
Portland, OR: ACE.
 White, D., Meyers, C., Doerfert, D., & Irlbeck, E. (Eds.). (2014). Proceedings from
ACE '14: Exploring Agriculturalists' Use of Social Media for Agricultural Marketing.
Portland, OR: ACE.
 World Bank. (2016). World Development Report 2016: Digital Dividends. Washington, DC: World Bank.
 Wright, D. K., & Hinson, M. D. (2010). An analysis of new communications media
use in public relations: Results of a five-year trend study. Public Relations Journal,
4(2), 1-14.
 Yoo, K. H., & Kim, J. R. (2013). How U.S. state tourism offices use online newsrooms and social media in media relations. Public Relations Review, 39(5), 495-497.
 Ag Chat Foundation. (2014). Retrieved from http://agchat.org
 Agricultural Information. (n.d.). Journal of Applied Communications.
59
 Allen, K., Abrams, K., Meyers, C., & Shultz, A. (2010, January 01). A little birdie
told me about agriculture: Best practices and future uses of Twitter in agricultural
communications. Journal of Applied Communications.
 American Association for Agricultural Education. (2011). National Research Agenda
American Association for Agricultural Education’s Research Priority Areas for 20112015.
 Associated Press. (2013). Social Media Guidelines for AP Employees. Retrieved from
http://www.ap.org/Images/Social-Media-Guidelines_tcm28-9832.pdf
 Bajkiewicz, T. E., Kraus, J. J., & Hong, S. Y. (2011, September 01). The impact of
newsroom changes and the rise of social media on the practice of media relations.
Public Relations Review.
 Barbassa, J. (2010). Farmers defend way of life with Facebook, Twitter. ABC News.
Retrieved from http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=11070012
 Boyd, D. M., & Ellison, N. B. (2008, October 1). Social Network Sites: Definition,
History, and Scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1).
 Boyd, M. (2013, August 16). Social media's role in modern public relations. Retrieved
from
http://www.prdaily.com/Main/Articles/Social_medias_role_in_modern_public_relatio
ns_15017.aspx
 Charanza, A. D., & Naile, T. L. (2012, January 01). Media dependency during a food
safety incident related to the U.S. beef industry. Journal of Applied Communications.
 Curtis, L., Edwards, C., Fraser, K. L., Gudelsky, S., Holmquist, J., Thornton, K., &
Sweetser, K. D. (2010, March 1). Adoption of social media for public relations by
nonprofit organizations. Public Relations Review, 36(1).
 Eyrich, N., Padman, M. L., & Sweetser, K. D. (2008, November 01). PR practitioners'
use of social media tools and communication technology. Public Relations Review,
34(4), 412-414.
 GFRAS. (2012). Fact Sheet on Extension Services. Position Paper. Global Forum for
Rural Advisory Services (GFRAS) June 2012.
 González-Herrero, A., & Ruiz de Valbuena, M. (2006). Trends in online media relations: Web-based corporate pressrooms in leading international companies. Public Relations Review, 32(3).
 Gordon, R. (2009). Social Media: The Ground Shifts. Nieman Reports, 63(3).
 Government of India. (2015). Two Mobile Apps Launched for Farmers. Press Information Bureau, December. Retrieved from
http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=133861
 Goyal, A. (2011). ICT in Agriculture Sourcebook: Connecting Smallholders to
Knowledge, Networks, and Institutions. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.
 Grant, D. (2010, June 17). Stallman: farmers must connect with consumers. Farm
Week Now. Retrieved from
http://www.farmweeknow.com/story.aspx?s=39250&c=1&pv=1
 Hocking, J., McDermott, S., & Stacks, D. (2003). Communication Research (3rd ed.).
Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
 ICAR. (2016). Reaching out to farmers through e-extension initiatives [Flyer]. Indian
Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR). Available: [URL]
60
 Jackson, C., Berdou, E., Ngounoue, V., Kreutz, C., & Clark, L. (2009). Use of social
media to share knowledge on agricultural impact, planning, assessment, and learning.
People-Centered Approaches to Working Paper. Agricultural Learning and Impacts
Network, London, UK.
 Jung, M. S., & Hyun, K. D. (2014, March 01). Online Media Relations as an Information Subsidy: Quality of Fortune 500 Companies' Websites and Relationships to
Media Salience. Mass Communication and Society, 17(2).
 Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010, January 1). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media. Business Horizons, 53(1).
 Knutson, J. (2011). Ag turns to social media to make its case. AGWEEK. Retrieved
from http://www.agweek.com/event/article/id/17797/
 Lederman, L. C. (1990). Assessing education effectiveness: The focus group interview as a technique for data collection. Communication Education, 39(2).
 Lucas, C. F. (2011). An analysis and recommendations of the use of social media
within the Co-operative extension system: Opportunities, Risks, and Barriers. Honors
Thesis, College of Agriculture, Life Sciences, Social Sciences, Cornell University,
USA.
 Meena, K. C., Chand, S., & Meena, N. R. (2013). Impact of social media in sharing
information on issues related to agriculture among researchers and extension professionals. Advances in Applied Research, 5(2).
 Merriam-Webster. (2015). Social media. Retrieved from http://www.merriamwebster.com/social-media/
 Meyers, C., Irlbeck, E., Graybill-Leonard, M., & Doerfert, D. (2011). Advocacy in
Agricultural Social Movements: Exploring Facebook as a Public Relations Communications Tool. Journal of Applied Communication, 95(2).
 Morgan, D. L. (1988). Focus Groups as Qualitative Research. Newbury Park, CA:
Sage.
 Mugenda, O., & Mugenda, A. (2003). Research Methods: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches. Nairobi, Kenya: ACTS Press.
 Neill, O. B., Zumwalt, A., & Bechman, J. (2011). Social Media Use of Cooperative
Extension Family Economics Educators: Online Survey Results and Implications.
Journal of Extension, 49(5), 5FEA2.
 Newbury, E., Humphreys, L., & Fuess, L. (2014). Over the Hurdles: Barriers to Social
Media Use in Extension Offices. Journal of Extension, 52(2), 2FEA3.
 NSSO. (2014). Key Indicators of Situation of Agricultural Households in India, NSS
70th Round. Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation. New Delhi, India.
 Payn-Knoper, M. (2009, June 10). Twitter's business value to agriculture. Message
posted to http://causematters.wordpress.com/2009/06/10/twitters-business-value-toagriculture
 Pew Research Center. (2014). Social Networking Fact Sheet. Retrieved from
http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheets/social-networking-fact-sheet/
 Public Broadcasting Service. (n.d.). The Development of Radio. Retrieved from
www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/rescue/sfeature/radio.html
 Roth, C., Vogt, W., & Weinheimer, L. (2002). Joint effort boosts APS' benefits.
AgriMarketing, 32(2).
61
 Rubin, A. M., Rubin, R. B., & Piele, L. J. (2005). Communication Research: Strategies and Sources (6th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
 Ruth-McSwain, A. (2008). Penchant for Print: Media Strategies in Communicating
Agricultural Information. Journal of Applied Communications, 92(2).
 Saravanan, R., Suchiradipta, B., Chowdhury, A., Hambly, O. H., & Hall, K. (2015).
Social Media for Rural Advisory Services. Good Practice Notes for Extension and
Advisory Services, Note 15. Lindau, Switzerland: GFRAS.
 Shanthinichandra, Karthikeyan, & Mohanraj (2013). Farmers' Willingness to Pay
(WTP) Behavior for ICT Based Extension Approach. International Journal of Extension Education.
 Stanley, S. (2013). Harnessing Social Media in Agriculture: A Report for the New
Zealand Nuffield Farming Scholarship Trust. NZ Nuffield Scholar.
 Stringer, S., & Thomson, J. (1999, June). Defining agricultural issues: Daily newspapers editors' perspectives. Paper presented at the meeting of Agricultural Communicators in Education/National Extension Technology Conference, Knoxville, TN.
 Sutter, J. D. (2009, July 2). Twittering from the tractor: Smartphones sprout on the
farm. CNN.com. Retrieved from
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/07/02/twitter.farmer/Index.html
 TEK Group. (2012). Online newsroom survey report. Retrieved from [URL]
 TEK Group. (n.d.). Online newsroom survey. Retrieved from [URL]
 Tweeten, J. F. (2014). Perceptions Regarding Importance and Frequency of Use of
Selected Communication Tools by Iowa Cattle Producers. Retrieved from Digital Depository @ Iowa State University.
 Varner, J. (2012). Agriculture and Social Media. Retrieved from
http://msucares.com/pubs/infosheets/is1946.pdf
 Wells, C. (2012). Uses of social media by Ohio House of Representatives and Ohio
Senate members as it relates to agricultural policies. (Master's thesis). Retrieved from
WorldCat database.
 White, D., Meyers, C., Doerfert, D., & Irlbeck, E. (Eds.). (2014). Proceedings from
ACE '14: Exploring Agriculturalists' Use of Social Media for Agricultural Marketing.
Portland, OR: ACE.
 White, D., Meyers, C., Doerfert, D., & Irlbeck, E. (Eds.). (2014). Proceedings from
ACE '14: Exploring Agriculturalists' Use of Social Media for Agricultural Marketing.
Portland, OR: ACE.
 World Bank. (2016). World Development Report 2016: Digital Dividends. Washington, DC: World Bank.
 Wright, D. K., & Hinson, M. D. (2010). An analysis of new communications media
use in public relations: Results of a five-year trend study. Public Relations Journal,
4(2).
 Yoo, K. H., & Kim, J. R. (2013). How U.S. state tourism offices use online newsrooms and social media in media relations. Public Relations Review, 39(5).
62