Climate Change, Global Warming, et al: What’s missing in the public debate?

As Congress considers the "American Clean Energy and Security Act" this week (the house has narrowly passed their version 219-212 as of this writing), you would think that by now there would be a clear and general consensus on the issue in the USA - its challenges, implications for our future well-being (survival?) and focused actions.  And by now, you would think that Climate Change (or Global Warming if you prefer) would be top of mind in this country.

Well, at least from what I see, there is no consensus, and the issue ranks dead last in the minds of voters.  That’s what happens when an issue has not been made personal and timely.

When I talk to friends about climate change (global warming or any other name you choose), the conversation usually comes around to “How will it affect me”?  For those who are still on the fence about it, the question is always preceded by “If it is real…”

And when I ask them (on either side of the issue) how they think it will affect them, they simply can’t describe that future for themselves, and don’t even try for their children or grandchildren.

So I have been thinking about some things:

1. What’s keeping so many people on the fence about the issue?
2. What’s causing so many people not to feel an imperative for immediate action?
3. What’s preventing people from understanding the issue?

I suddenly realized last week that three things are clouding the ability of people to come to grips with the issue:

1. The issue is huge - so big that most people can’t get their arms around it, much less understand it
2. The issue is still abstract - understanding and dealing with abstract concepts is something people don’t want to do and is very difficult to do when they do
3. The issue is simply not personal yet – and this might just be the biggest reason of all

And the reason it’s not personal yet?  There is no story or narrative about it that provides a pattern or model (using characters we can identify with) to make it personal.

I came to this point after going back and looking at books, magazine articles, presentations, movies, TV specials, etc.  There is an abundance of great graphics, tons of tables and figures, maps with colors, great slide presentations (e.g., Al Gore’s), apocalyptic movies with very questionable premises (The Day After, et al) and TV shows with pictures of crashing seas and calving icebergs, not to mention the lonely polar bears on the little ice floes.

But there is no story, no narrative about people like you or me and billions others.

And by story and narrative, I mean in the most basic sense – characters, developed over time, showing how something affects them, their children, grandchildren, and their world over time.  And time is a big part of the abstraction here.

Global warming by all accounts will happen gradually, over decades (not in an apocalyptic way as shown in The Day After).  For us to understand something that unfolds over a 25-50-100 year time span and how it will affect us, we need to see it unfold.  And to see it unfold and make it real, we have to see it unfold and see it affect people over that time.  People like you and me (whoever you are, wherever you are).

Can we really expect people to take such an abstract concept as global warming (or climate change) and be able to create a future in their minds where they can see themselves, their children and grandchildren living the changes?  I don’t know about you, but I think it’s hard for most people to take a still abstract concept, that so far is presented with charts and graphs, tons of data (used by both sides to make opposite cases for and against) tables and numbers, apocalyptic movies and TV talk shows -  and then be able from all of that to create a future vision they can see themselves in, much less their children and grandchildren.

And when you add in the debate from both extreme sides, well, I am afraid people are turning off and tuning out the debate (right here I have to say that right now it’s not a real debate, more of a shouting match – and please note I am not coming down on whether it should even be a debate).

The idea of the issue and the missings in the debate were brought home in the last couple of weeks through four events:

1. A 2009 Pew Research Center poll showing that global warming is 20^th (dead last) on issues and concerns of voters
2. An article in the New York Times on Saturday, May 2^nd  by John M. Broder on the attempt by advocate groups to use new terms to make the case for “global warming” (seems that term turns people off through the images it evokes in people’s minds – “…shaggy headed liberals, economic sacrifice and complex scientific disputes…”).  He also notes the same Pew poll with links
3. Re-reading The Anatomy of Story, by John Truby
4. Talking with Gerald Harris, an old friend from GBN (Global Business Network), about scenarios and narratives

Suffice it to say, these four seemingly separate events came together for me and turned into the idea of the missing personal story of climate change for our children, our grandchildren and us.

The more I thought about this idea I wondered why no one had pushed this idea (perhaps they have, but I have no heard it).  And the more I have come to think that more books and articles (and cool slide shows and video with no people feeling, living with and dealing with the changes) will simply not get the job done: too restricted readership and market (readers, price, language, etc.).

But what can do it is film and TV, given the right approach, script and premise.  And film would be the single best because of the wider distribution, although TV could show more stories over time, in short segments – so perhaps a combined effort.  Either or both have tremendous capacity for reaching across the globe (and as we have seen language is not a barrier given subtitles and dubbing) and it could be done fast if it is considered important enough.

So I want to see the story, of different people across the globe, as they grow and age, begin to see and feel the changes, make decisions (bad or good), see their actions and results of decisions and actions.  I want to see how it affects their children, how they feel, act and deal with the legacy we leave them, and how they hand their legacy to their children.  And I want to see what happens not only in the US, but also in Europe, Asia, Africa, South America – I want to see the global story.

People watching this film or TV series or both will see themselves in these characters with the right script (story/narrative) – and in doing so they will have a model, a scenario if you will that will seem not only plausible but also probable.  They’ll see the debate and argument in a new light (from themselves), not as an abstract idea.  They’ll be able to live the changes, the decisions, the actions and the results, for good or ill.

And I bet consensus and action will not be far behind.

So this is the challenge for the film and TV industry – will they step up, or will they sit this one out, and miss a golden opportunity that could have far and future implications for us all?

Comments

[Doooh_Head]

In my opinion, some of the reasons why there has been no action on "Climate Change" (et all) is that people (you, me, everyone) are too self absorbed to see the world around us. We are too concerned with our own "little" lives compared to the big (huge!) picture, of the world. We have to deal with our daily commute to our occupation that keeps us busy everyday. Then we have to deal with that occupation and the people surrounding it. Then we have to deal with the people at home, spouses, children, grand children, friends, etc. Then we have to deal with protecting what is "ours", our home, our vehicles, RV's, etc. It just keeps going and going. When do we ever stop to "smell the roses"? And its bigger than just doing some gardening. People have to get together on this topic. Have no other purpose than simply improving our habitat, our world. So how could it happen with us all being like this? It can't...not until some catastrophe happens that interrupts our self-absorbed "little world". Is this the purpose of the myths surrounding the year 2012? We'll soon find out.