Ben Hale posted a link to this video at his blog, Cruel Mistress, under the headline “Gaia’s Fever.” It appears to be from the Alliance of Small Island States, and when I went to their Web site to have a look, I couldn’t help but feel for their plight. But I’ve got to ask: is the video above really an effective way to move people?
Given the looming failure of the conference (except, perhaps, for a possible deal on preventing deforestation and other land-use changes that add greenhouse gases to the atmosphere), I am still wondering whether fear appeals ultimately are going to lead to progress. I’ve been excoriated for saying this before (much to my puzzlement), but wouldn’t a framing emphasizing innovation and progress in energy technology work better?
This thing has 2 Comments
It’s interesting that you approach this from the standpoint of framing. Disciplinary differences between us, I suppose, but I don’t see why we should focus too much on the framing question. It is true, probably, that some (maybe many) people may be more moved to act by the prospect of innovation and progress in energy technology… but that’s certainly not true for all people. Lots of people are moved to act because they are scared limp, or because they anthropomorphize the earth and don’t want to hurt their mother. It’s probably fair to say that the people who made this video think that. Some people are also motivated to move because they think that God has told them that the earth needs to be stewarded. Maybe that works too.
So one question for me, I guess, is not whether this “works” — as it probably works in some contexts — but whether or not it is apt, whether or not it really tells us something that is (near to) accurate and also helpful. Maybe the God trope works very well, but I wouldn’t want to endorse it. I find it extremely problematic.
I suppose my thinking is shifting toward Ben’s on this. I posted recently on Huff Post that I’m growing increasingly wary of thinking in “frames” (though it’s a handy and useful construct) because it encourages us too much to focus on what works and not enough on what questions we should be asking, what arguments must be made.
And, focusing on “what works” also emphasizes trying to convince others of the CO2 problem, the over-focus on which is probably a key problem (which I think is an argument RPJ makes often and convincingly).
That said, if we’re looking at “frames,” the apocalypse frame is really effective with some parts of the population and totally inappropriate for many others. I think the problem is the preponderance of this particular frame with relation to cc; there are so many other ways to look about it, to think about it, etc.
Jen
CSM
P.S. Haven’t read Ben’s follow-up yet. Will go there now.
This thing has 2 Trackbacks
[...] 2009 My buddy Tom Yulsman got me thinking this morning about what “works.” He offers this post, in part a response to my earlier Gaia’s Fever post, querying whether the [...]
[...] for many December 18, 2009 — Richard Gayle Does this work?: [Via CEJournal] Ben Hale posted a link to this video at his blog, Cruel Mistress, under the [...]