Science and Technology Studies scholars have promoted public engagement in science and technology through venues such as deliberative workshops in to order to engage key actors in providing a participatory appraisal of the use of and governance approaches for emerging technologies. This chapter focuses on a case study of a deliberative workshop that was convened to engage publics around use and governance of gene editing in agriculture and food, and explores what values, assumptions and concepts are framing the debate around gene editing. I take a narrative approach to analyze the deliberative workshop text to ask: what are participants’ substantive concerns when they are discussing gene editing in food and agriculture; how are these concerns produced in interactive discussion; and what master narratives (or stories) do they draw on in their discussions? Overall, the workshop revealed a narrow framing of the issues by participants, and assumptions of scientific progress and public benefit through neoliberal voluntary governance of agricultural biotechnology were largely shared among participants. This case study reveals challenges with engaging ‘publics’ in complex and contentious science and technology issues.