Differences in text

I think one main difference in the text is where each of the readings are coming from. The first was strongly in support of organic food, rather that its not doing enough. The second was impartial and was simply a study on them. But the third was about the problem of organics and how it limits food in countries that are food insecure like africa. This difference means that each one will be biased in its own way, besides the survey which was right in between them. Another difference is their approach. The farmer in the first was trying to call for a change in policy, while the survey was simply trying to inform. However the last one used slander of the organic industry to get its point across. I feel the way in which these were written plays a key roll in how we are meant to interpret them.