Comments on: Climate communication: Is fear + collective action a winning strategy? http://www.globalchangeblog.com/2010/03/climate-communication-is-fear-collective-action-a-winning-strategy/ Intersection of Nature and Culture Mon, 15 Nov 2010 23:22:15 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.4 By: Dan Mandle http://www.globalchangeblog.com/2010/03/climate-communication-is-fear-collective-action-a-winning-strategy/comment-page-1/#comment-798 Dan Mandle Thu, 25 Mar 2010 12:37:10 +0000 http://www.globalchangeblog.com/?p=3848#comment-798 Love your blog! Nature mag ran some reporting last year that also described how fear-tinged messaging was counterproductive in the struggle to manage global warming. The Center for Research on Environmental Decisions also offers a free booklet on this subject. I work in the communications business (I.e., marketing) and we saw a study recently about how antialcohol and antidrug messages targeting teens actually increase use of those substances when those messages are negative. Disclosure: Bowdoin grad, Class of '99. Part of the team behind the Hopenhagen campaign in the months leading up to the UN COP15 sessions in Copenhagen. Love your blog! Nature mag ran some reporting last year that also described how fear-tinged messaging was counterproductive in the struggle to manage global warming. The Center for Research on Environmental Decisions also offers a free booklet on this subject. I work in the communications business (I.e., marketing) and we saw a study recently about how antialcohol and antidrug messages targeting teens actually increase use of those substances when those messages are negative.
Disclosure: Bowdoin grad, Class of ’99. Part of the team behind the Hopenhagen campaign in the months leading up to the UN COP15 sessions in Copenhagen.

]]> By: JD http://www.globalchangeblog.com/2010/03/climate-communication-is-fear-collective-action-a-winning-strategy/comment-page-1/#comment-601 JD Mon, 08 Mar 2010 16:30:53 +0000 http://www.globalchangeblog.com/?p=3848#comment-601 I find it interesting that you wonder why American are unlikely to combat climate change without even addressing te percentage of American who are convinced that 1) CO2 is the only, or even the primary cause of the 1 degree of warming we've seen in the last century, or 2) that warming, and any possible future warming - if caused by man made CO2 increases - will ever constitute a crisis. My read is that Americans aren't convinced on either of those two points. You're apparoaching this from an advocate's standpoint, as does Al Gore. You're convinced, which leads you to ask questions like this. Many others aren't convinced with that the surface temperature record is reliable, wonder about urban heat island biases, and have seen climate scientists act in ways that are increasingly like advocates. Since the emails from East Anglica were made public, and in the recent furor over the IPPC's use of non-peer reviewed literature, we've seen the 'settled science' begin to unravel a bit. It's not quite as settled as some would have us believe, and the vast majority of the American people are not idiots. They can see what's happening. My advice - instead of handwringing over why people 'just don't get it', and trying to craft a marketing campaign to sell it to them, first ensure the product you're selling is the same one you're advertising. I find it interesting that you wonder why American are unlikely to combat climate change without even addressing te percentage of American who are convinced that 1) CO2 is the only, or even the primary cause of the 1 degree of warming we’ve seen in the last century, or 2) that warming, and any possible future warming – if caused by man made CO2 increases – will ever constitute a crisis.

My read is that Americans aren’t convinced on either of those two points. You’re apparoaching this from an advocate’s standpoint, as does Al Gore. You’re convinced, which leads you to ask questions like this. Many others aren’t convinced with that the surface temperature record is reliable, wonder about urban heat island biases, and have seen climate scientists act in ways that are increasingly like advocates.

Since the emails from East Anglica were made public, and in the recent furor over the IPPC’s use of non-peer reviewed literature, we’ve seen the ‘settled science’ begin to unravel a bit. It’s not quite as settled as some would have us believe, and the vast majority of the American people are not idiots. They can see what’s happening.

My advice – instead of handwringing over why people ‘just don’t get it’, and trying to craft a marketing campaign to sell it to them, first ensure the product you’re selling is the same one you’re advertising.

]]> By: Climate communication: Is fear + collective action a winning … | the world cares.com http://www.globalchangeblog.com/2010/03/climate-communication-is-fear-collective-action-a-winning-strategy/comment-page-1/#comment-582 Climate communication: Is fear + collective action a winning … | the world cares.com Sun, 07 Mar 2010 04:39:04 +0000 http://www.globalchangeblog.com/?p=3848#comment-582 [...] here: Climate communication: Is fear + collective action a winning … Tags: climate, climate-crisis, consequences, fear, message, safe-sex, safer-sex, the-fear [...] [...] here: Climate communication: Is fear + collective action a winning … Tags: climate, climate-crisis, consequences, fear, message, safe-sex, safer-sex, the-fear [...]

]]>