JOUR 3745 Honors Project

Media Analysis

2008-12-03T03:55:09Z

Live Earth Event

]]> Live Earth was a monumental music event, featuring more than 150 of the world’s best music acts, that brought together a global audience of close to two billion fans on July 7, 2007 to combat the climate crisis (liveearth.org). It is the first event of its kind to dedicate twenty-four hours of music and media coverage across seven continents in an effort to deliver a worldwide message calling for action and solutions to global warming. By compelling individuals, corporations and governments to get involved, Live Earth has generated a large amount of positive feedback while simultaneously achieving its goal of reducing carbon dioxide emissions and waste by producing a “carbon neutral�? event. But is it really possible to be “carbon neutral�? and does the fact that one can offset carbon emissions really help the environment in the long run? It might be worth a closer look at how the message that Live Earth created and delivered has also generated negative feedback by contradicting its very purpose. The Live Earth event is an example of how communicating nature occurs at many different levels that are not always congruent with each other and may lead to an inconsistency between attitudes and behaviors.
Applying the concepts from Corbett’s book, she might begin by emphasizing that a concert for a cause and the wide variety of the people it hosts might identify themselves as environmentalists when in fact each individual may behave very differently toward the environment. Even though the majority of Americans support environmental protection, they might not really strive for it. This seems to be the biggest contradiction in Live Earth’s message, that the celebrities that made appearances, the concertgoers that attended and the concert production itself – all in the effort to raise awareness, produced more waste and contributed to more pollution than would have resulted if the event had never occurred.
The total carbon footprint of the event, taking into account the artists' and spectators' travel to the concert, and the energy consumption on the day, is likely to be at least 31,500 tonnes of carbon emissions, according to John Buckley of Carbonfootprint.com, who specializes in such calculations (dailymail.co.uk). While the Live Earth organization purchased carbon offsets to counteract this waste, it doesn’t seem logical that this is the type of action that should be taken by people that believe in reducing harm to the environment. In this situation, the concertgoers are equating entertainment in nature as a consumption opportunity and aren’t thinking about the consequences of their behaviors. Especially considering the lives of many celebrities and their involvement in leisure activities (jetting across the world, driving expensive yet gas-guzzling vehicles, and spending superfluously on consumer goods) it is difficult to communicate the importance of living simply and efficiently. While offsetting carbon emissions may be a temporary substitute for a solution, restoring the environment is ultimately something incapable of being bought or sold.
Perhaps the event can be viewed more as a public relations effort and recruitment for a cause, while for the celebrities it was exposure and validation that they care. Either way, Live Earth speakers insisted that it was in everyone’s self-interest and this is true considering the percentage of citizens expressing support for the environment is phenomenally high, and in a way people are just jumping on the bandwagon. The event was perfectly pitched as an appeal to self-preservation – this is the epitome of the anthropocentric view that Corbett describes throughout the book and also displays how people are encouraged to think of themselves and their private worlds, which contributes to a very narcissistic perspective. Although we have a sense that nature somehow should counter consumerism and serve as an antidote to materialism, it is actually used for the opposite goal in Live Earth’s case. The point is, no job, no matter what level, escapes the environmental consequences of its labor and that is why it is necessary for actions to match attitudes.
In another instance of the clash between these concepts, Al Gore presented a seven-point pledge for action to slow the process of global warming (including cutting down on carbon emissions within the home and fighting against the building of new coal-burning factories). Unfortunately, no clear long-term goal was ever presented, other than the very vague mission of saving the world for future generations – and this isn’t a new plea. Corbett notes that preaching the loss to future generations is regarded as the most common way to appeal to an audience about environmental concerns, again because it is in human self-interest. People are most responsive to a guilt-trip that provides an outlet and simple solution to solve the problem, but the simple solution is missing here and that means the message might have been lost along the way. While the event was significant only during its occurrence, it may have had little long-term impact on those who were a part of it and while individuals may have pledged, it doesn’t mean they consistently follow any of the suggested actions.
Throughout all of the hype to promote awareness, the audience forgets that ultimately they are dealing with the forces of nature rather than narcissistically discussing weather systems that need to be appeased. Officials at one of the nine concert locations have blamed the effects of climate change for poor audience attendance at the event. Speaking before the event, Langford said, "We're expecting 10,000 here tonight. It's a bit chilly, and we've had a strange winter...is it climate change? We had snow in Jo'burg last week for the first time in 25 years" (contactmusic.com). However, critics have blamed poor publicity for the weak audience turn out. The irony of Corbett’s quote, “the weather doesn’t give a damn!�? comes to mind, because it points out that forecasts present weather as a phenomenon that’s anthropocentric, to be controlled, and with which we connect most strongly through consumption and leisure. We base many activities around this and often personify and blame the weather by claiming, “it ruined our weekend�? or “wreaked havoc�? on us. The fact remains that Mother Nature doesn’t care if you want nice weather – even if it is for a good cause.
Another interesting point is how the climate crisis obtains attention from the media during this event and the fact that there is still that unavoidable element of advertising involved. At one point an actress does a personal service announcement about why buying digital music is more environmentally friendly because there is no oil wasted in making plastic CDs and energy is saved by not physically transporting discs around (dailymail.co.uk). Conveniently, Al Gore is on the board of Apple, which just happens to be the largest digital-music retailer and is a prime example of the interlocking of media institutions and deregulation between politicians and media. The dominance of social problems depends on the ideological questions determined by the political power structure. It is often difficult to challenge the status quo and put new ideas into circulation without really establishing a large supportive network and gaining credibility. It is also extremely difficult in contemporary society to spread social movement without gaining access to the mass media. In essence, “the medium becomes the movement�? and that was the exact objective of this event – to have the concert become the cause.
In response to critics saying that more could have been done with less, Live Earth’s Kevin Wall says, “Frankly, you can only reach so many people standing around a campfire singing ‘Kumba Ya’. The goal is to educate and inspire billions of people worldwide to take action, and while that effort generated carbon emissions on one day, those impacted by this event have been motivated to reduce their energy use every day�? (liveearth.org). It might be extreme to suggest the last claim and it is difficult to determine whether people’s attitudes really coincide with their every day behavior, but it definitely achieved partial success by Corbett’s standards.
It is mainly a question of whether or not there is a more efficient way to communicate the same message – maybe there is a way to get people consciously involved in the effort without actually requiring them to be physically together. The Internet has provided a medium by which people all over the nation can quickly get into contact and organize for a cause and with the emergence of new technology in this digital age this is becoming much more feasible. Maybe someday soon smart mobs will mobilize to promote environmental awareness. In the end, however unfocused Live Earth’s presentation was, one could say that it was a genuine effort to reach out to people and to inspire the developed world to think twice before buying an SUV. It has definitely started people thinking – now we must hope that they will act as well.

Bibliography
“About the Event�? and “Live Earth Issues Final Assessment Report, Meeting Goals for Reducing CO2 Emissions and Waste at 07/07/07.�? Live Earth. 26 Nov. 2008 .
Corbett, Julia B. Communicating Nature: How We Create and Understand Environmental Messages. Washington, D.C. Island Press: 2006.
“Live Earth is Promoting Green to Save the Planet - What Planet are They On?�? Mail Online. 07 July 2007. 26 Nov. 2008 .
“UB40 - Live Earth Johannesburg Officials Blame Climate Change for Poor Turn-Out.�? contactmusic.com. Contact Music. 08 July 2007. 26 Nov. 2008 .

Week 10

2008-11-26T04:18:28Z

CH 10 Communication and Social Change

]]> Throughout the semester, much of our analysis of media has focused on the dominant institutions that control, power and produce most of what we see, hear and read. It is often difficult to challenge the status quo and put new ideas into circulation without really establishing a large supportive network and gaining credibility. Event then the dominant social paradigms will do whatever is in their power to keep things the way they are. As far as communicating nature goes, there are a number of contrasting features between the dominant social paradigm and the environmental paradigm. I will outline a few below:
Dominant: emphasizes human dominion over nature (anthropocentric), environment is a resource that funds progress, humans are the dominant species, only humans have rights, things have value according to standards set by humans, individuals act in their own best interest, more conservative politically.
Environmental: emphasizes humans as interdependent part of nature, sustainability and conservation are preferred, humans are merely one species among many, all entities that act with purpose have rights, diversity and harmony are valued, individual behavior contributes to collective good, more liberal politically.
It is clear that where humans want to live and play and work are the primary considerations for how land and resources are used and with this dominant paradigm in control it is difficult to imagine what the environmental paradigm might even look like and what kinds of change are needed to bring it about. While a democratic society is concerned with meeting the needs of its citizens, there is a “strong upper-class accent�? and it is “more responsive to powerful upper-class interests and less likely to heed the call for change when it comes from outside its own class�? (Corbett, 285). Within this dominant institution lies the media, which exerts a tremendous social control pressure.
Environmental change begins at the grassroots level, with activists working on issues of “environmental justice.�? As groups strive to gain more members and power to gain success they must be weary, however, of the double-edged sword. Success can “initiate a maturation that makes the group appear less firmly outside the social institutions from which it seeks to change�? (289). In other words, as a group becomes more formal and tries to represent the views of all of its members, it may shift to “tamer�? action that resembles the operation of the surrounding social institutions.
The internal structure of environmental groups both formal and informal greatly affects communication choices. Many hire PR representatives and initiate contact with the media daily and some have even issued video news releases. Many national groups use their websites to speak to members and encourage their action through phone calls, letters, and increasingly by e-mail. The Internet has provided a medium by which people all over the nation can quickly get into contact and organize for a cause. Examples of this include the organization Greenpeace and its website which allows people to click on the words “act now�? and then choose from several issues. The links lead you to a letter that’s already written that you are free to edit and then send. (http://members.greenpeace.org/action/)
Research has shown that the most effective communication is that which discusses how environmental topics will produce losses for the current generation since it might appeal more to self-interest and is therefore more important to individuals. Another way of getting people to take action is through guilt appeals, but in the long run this could actually lose its appeal as people become desensitized to being called guilty and feeling that they have no way to dig themselves out of their role. People are most responsive to guilt that provides an outlet and simple solution to make a difference. News coverage is also vital to the mobilization of new members and overall public opinion. “The public’s perception of a movement’s intensity of action may reflect media coverage rather than the actual memberships strength of the scope and intensity of grievances�? (297). It is also extremely difficult in contemporary society to spread social movement without gaining access to the mass media. In essence, “the medium becomes to movement�? because media coverage pursed by a group shapes its leadership, goals, and success. Again, this can have a moderating and conservative effect on what is produced by groups as they redefine their issues to make them more acceptable for the larger public. There are three possible outcomes for a movement and the groups within it: total failure (achieving no social change), total success (enacting a new ideology and practice), or partial success (which occurs most often).
The ironic thing is that the more successful a social change movement, the more likely that the movement ideals and language will be co-opted. This is what has occurred with green communication and the corporate world. The American public has become more accepting of “the most basic premise of environmental protection�?, but the very meaning of environmentalism and environmentalists has been diluted. The percentage of citizens expressing support for the environment is phenomenally high, and in a way people are just jumping on the bandwagon. Corporations realize this and are trying to take advantage of the money and power that can be earned from associating one’s organization or products with a green image. Hopefully in the future the movement will be able to gain control of the crucial underlying problems and promote real change.

Week 9

2008-11-22T05:10:57Z

CH 9 “Battle for Spin: The Public Relations Industry�?

]]> When PR emerged in the 1920s it was not seen as a “bad�? image like it is often associated with today. Like we discussed in class, it is now often thought of as something that is slimy and manipulative, slick or good for an organization in a selfish way. This might be a gross oversimplification, but the question is how far and to whose benefit the push of PR can go to result in honest communication and not manipulation and dishonesty. It is clear that most corporations today are striving to outshine the rest by promoting a green image and telling the world what they do to be environmentally friendly. It is easy to find information all over the media containing environmental policy statements by such companies, but the “majority of companies voluntarily publishing a statement do not commit to most of the specific policies�? (Corbett, 252). Some argue that the status granted to corporations has turned them into the worst kind of citizen, claming the rights but not the responsibilities of citizenship. From what we saw in the video “The Corporation�? in class, this seemed to be the take home message as well. Corbett makes reference to the film saying that it shows how companies are made to appear “indispensable, responsible for progress and the good life, and as the most efficient from of business�? Now that corporations have the legal status of a natural person, it is difficult to draw the line between what they can and cannot do.
A lot of this chapter reviewed the historical context of the PR industry as we had read in many of the articles – discussing the first PR man P.T. Barnum and Edward Bernays. What I learned that was new from this chapter was the use of “greenwashing�? or the “disinformation disseminated by an organization so as to present an environmentally responsibly public image�? (Oxford English Dictionary). Basically, messages crafted by PR are what make an organization look eco-friendly, but it is not always easy to discern whether it is true or not. The messages subject to greenwashing are mainly those that come from the organization – anything from websites to brochures to advertisements. Recent environmental image ads can be seen by a wide range of companies including the following: GM, Mobil, Georgia-Pacific, Chrysler, Mitsubishi, and Dow Chemical. A leading PR figure in all of this is E. Bruce Harrison, who published a book Going Green: How to Communicate Your Company’s Environmental Commitment in 1993. According to the book he concludes that the key is communication, not action – this definitely leads me to believe that it is important to have a critical eye of what kind of statements you hear in media, particularly regarding environmentalism.
One example that I thought worthy of paying more attention to is the advertising for BP. I know I’ve seen a lot of advertising for what was once called British Petroleum in recent years. In 2000, the company began a $200 million “rebranding�? campaign, replacing its traditional logo with the green and yellow sunburst that is so prevalent today. Its name was shortened to BP and dubbed “Beyond Petroleum�? and has centered its campaign around “putting some sun into your life�? by installing solar panels in 200 gas stations around the world. This has all been in its effort to reach the environmentally friendly customer and has also promoted many other changes like deep water drilling technology, pipeline construction, and reducing its carbon footprint. What consumers don’t know is that despite all of this, it spends “ten thousand more on oil exploration and development�? than it does for “every sixteen dollars�? spend on solar energy. It should not come as a shock that many, if not most, other major corporations follow a similar pattern.
Sometimes it is difficult to imagine that this is true or come to accept it, especially after wanted to believe that most companies really do care. On the other hand, it is more important to come to the realization that perhaps federal regulations need to be put into place to restrict this kind of greenwash advertising. While there is nothing implicitly wrong with PR or its strategies and tactics, there have been examples of unethical practices in all sectors of advertising. Even the words Amy Goodman come to mind when I read this quote from the chapter, “With a fair and engaged discussion of all the viewpoints, we would logically and eventually arrive at good solutions�? (278). Her points were critical of the way media is portrayed in war, but I think her main message was that we never see the other side of that portrayal and that is a major reason citizens lack the knowledge of what else is going on in war. What’s most important is that both sides are represented fairly and accurately in our free marketplace of ideas so that people can exchange information for everyone’s benefit. Greenwashing undermines a democratic process and having an informed public.

Week 8

2008-11-15T04:03:37Z

CH 8 “News Media�?

]]> This chapter began to tie together many of the themes I’ve learned in class about news media organization and production. It was interesting to read this with a little bit of background knowledge about what kind of power news organizations have in the production process. Specifically, this chapter covered how environmental news gets published or aired and how its importance has fluctuated over the past few decades depending on the importance of other events going on at the time. For example, beat reporting on environmental issues became popular in the 1970s. In 1989 when the Exxon Valdex oil spill occurred in Alaska, “total news coverage of the environment by the three major TV networks reached an all-time high of 774 combined minutes�? (220). After the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the media diverted its attention from the environment to a host of other issues.
Since the rise of public relations in the 1920s, journalists have counted on obtaining news from self-serving publicity materials. Why? It saves media time and money. For the majority of journalists, there is not enough funding by their employers to go out and do the research themselves while gathering news. Also from the clip we watched in class, Corbett points to the production of VNR or video news releases complete with audio and visual. These free videos (sent on tapes or downloaded by TV stations for free from satellite feeds) greatly decrease the cost of producing TV newscasts. The Columbia Journalism Review found, “75% of TV news directors used at least one VNR B-roll (video footage and sounds without narration per week�? (222). Each station can then add its own voice-over narration (often from a script accompanying the VNR) onto the B-roll video. This makes it basically impossible to detect it as externally produced. Stations do resist crediting this material on-air for obvious reasons, but it is clear that although journalists make the ultimate decisions of which news tips to act up and which to ignore, they are still subject to the newsworthy information presented to them by outside sources.
Another way the media choose news is by considering dominant cultural values such as existing power and class arrangements. Examples include newspapers omitting news seen as adverse to the commercial sector – such as advertisers. Also there is a lack of news that is offense to “the values of families, religion, community, patriotism and business�? (223). Just like television shows avoid downtrodden topics and portray middle to middle-upper class families without a concern for monetary issues, news in print form sometimes does the same thing.
Walter Lippmann once described media attention as “a restless spotlight,�? due to its tendency to focus the glare intensely on a subject, but just as quickly to move on to another topic it finds more “sexy.�? Interestingly, since environmental issues are often continuous and constant, “the media’s short attention span contributes to its on-again off-again coverage of long-term environmental issues (224). Since environmental issues are often highly scientific and technical, journalists are even more susceptible to influence when they lack the expertise to fully understand concepts such as global climate change. Some scholars have found media coverage of the environment to be “a science-oriented discourse, dominated by scientific and government officials�? (224). The point is that readers are unable to evaluate where the balance of evidence lies when there is no space for dissenters and a scientific debate is promoted when there really is not one.
The dominance of social problems depend on the ideological questions determined by the political power structure, which is contrary to the conventional “watchdog�? model of the media that we discussed in class.

Week 7

2008-11-07T18:01:46Z

CH 7 "Communicating the Meaning of Animals�?

]]> How do we come to equate specific animals with certain places, businesses, sports and an endless number of activities within the consumer sphere. Corbett presents the fun challenge of filling in the blanks for:
Sly as ____
Eyes like an _____
An eager _____
Wiley ______
Stubborn as a ________
I was quickly able to fill these in with fox, eagle, beaver, coyote and mule and I’m sure most people would be able to do the same because of pop culture influences. Corbett points out that it’s impossible to divorce pop culture messages from our preconceived notions of what animals are like, especially if we don’t have sufficient personal experience and knowledge to bring to the table (178). We expect lions at the zoo to act more like “kings of the jungle�? rather than the lethargic beast dozing in its cage like we usually see. There are also many animal representations we relate to although we’ve never seen the animal in its native wild habitat.
Animals that serve as symbolic messengers for human values and animal characters are rampant in what we see in media. Why? Animals are the most tangible element of the larger environment and environmental issues. It makes sense that we tend to identify most closely with the living, breathing components of the natural world. Animals are concrete, picturable, and evoking of emotion. It’s easier to relate to the climate changes of the Artic when the lives of polar bears living there are considered. According to professor Stephen Kellert, who has studied perceptions of animals for decades, “animals may represent a metaphorical device for people to express basic perceptions and feelings about the nonhuman world�? (181). Animals can be used as a living symbol of possession of an environment and when we think of an animal we may think of its habitat – thus leading our minds to consider environmental preservation.
How did some animals, like the wolf, come to receive a bad connotation? Wolves have been described as evil, murderers, criminals, beasts etc., and mainly because according to human standards they do something that we do just as well: kill prey. Interestingly this isn’t the same attitude held by Native Americans and Eskimos who “didn’t mind sharing game and who attributed the wolf with many positive qualities, such as intelligence, boldness, and skill�? (184). For white settlers it has become encoded in our brains to have this anthropocentric view, which is actually positively correlated to having a negative attitude toward carnivores. Conversely, ecocentrism has a positive attitude toward carnivores.
In advertising, everything we admire about animals is available to exploit and capitalize upon. Examples like the grace of a bird and the agility of a tiger or the aesthetics of a zebra are all used to sell us products. We don’t even need experience with any of these animals to know what a certain product is supposed to provide. “Animals can signify many things: family roles, wildness, unpredictability, power, sexiness. They can signify relationships, attributes or both�? (207). According to advertising researchers, we like to believe that animals, especially mammals, have families similar to human families. We like to see when animal parents are good providers but are also capable of tenderness or playfulness. Studies have also found that women and men respond differently to animal images in ads. Women respond most positively to ads where animals represent nurturing relations and identify less when animals are used to express product attributes. Men like when animals embody desirable product attributes like power, speed and strength. This reminds me of an ad for horsepower wherein there are horses bursting out of a barn all lit afire to tell the audience that the car is incredibly powerful and you can have this too by buying the car and the horsepower fluid.
So it is evident that nothing speaks to us of the natural world as animals do. They represent the “antithesis of technological culture�? (212). We cannot entirely remove animals from their pop culture communication or from historical feelings. We use entire species as representations for human values and emotions. We do stereotype and generalize and we have preferences for animals most like us. The only time we really hear about animals in the news is when there is conflict over them or when they trespass beyond what we consider their habitat and into what we consider ours. It is important to remember that we share a common environment with animals and it is subject to the effects of degradation that depends on our actions as well as the feelings we communicate about them.

Week 6

2008-10-31T23:11:30Z

CH 6 “Faint-Green: Advertising and the Natural World�?

]]> As has been recited throughout many of the articles as well as videos in this class, we are exposed to three thousand advertisements each day and these are, without a doubt, the ultimate pop culture message. What we might fail to notice while viewing these ads is that they often contain elements of the natural world – usually in the form of a backdrop. Corbett describes these “Nature-as-backdrop�? ads as the majority of what we see in advertising, but often the least studied (148). Most research has been done recently on “green advertisements�? which focus on promoting environmental sensitivity toward some aspect of the biophysical world, promote a “green lifestyle�? or present a company as environmentally responsible.
As an aside, I learned from this chapter what the difference between advertising and marketing is. This was something that has always plagued me, and since I am not a business or communications major I never really could differentiate between the two. Here, Advertising is defined as the task of producing discrete promotional messages about products, services, or organizations and paying to display them through mass media channels like newspapers and televisions and in public venues, like billboards. Marketing is concerned with the entire process of selling a product or service through pricing, distribution, positioning, and promotion. (149).
A theme throughout the book so far has been that people have an inclination to anthropomorphize elements of nature, including animals. This is why we see many ads or commercials like a recent one I’ve seen wherein the animals in a car begin singing along with the driver. Advertisers have us link the personality and cultural meaning of the animal to the product. In this case, all of the wild animals in the car are supposed to give us the feeling that the SUV the man is driving is rugged and is made for driving through a wild environment, and not only that, but you can have a fun time while doing it. I’m sure most people are familiar with recent green image ads of popular companies like Budweiser. Sometimes they don’t even mention the product itself, but hope to have you associate with the environmental concern. This doesn’t seem far off from the tactics developed to change ads in the 1920s when ads stopped focusing on the product description and began equating it with a consumer lifestyle instead. Corbett even notes “The purpose of an ad is not to stress that the product functions properly, but that consumption of it will cure problems, whether loneliness, age, or even a desire to connect with the natural world�? (165).
The important thing to remember is that these types of ads are subject to “greenwashing�? when corporations pose as friends to the environment but their performance doesn’t match the image (153). There is often a lack of regulation regarding the statements made by companies and no consistent way of measuring the truthfulness between companies. For example, a company might say that a product uses only recyclable materials in its production when, in fact, it never used non-recyclable materials to begin with. Ads encourage “the promotion of a social order in which people are encouraged to think of themselves and their private worlds�? which contributes to a very anthropocentric and narcissistic perspective. The environment doesn’t work well as our private space because it must exist in concert with other social institutions in a way that is mutually reinforcing. We are almost always taught that we can use products to control and dominate nature. Although we have a sense that nature somehow should counter consumerism and serve as an antidote to materialism, it is actually used for the opposite goal in advertising. While I think that individuals can educate themselves about the reality of nature in advertising, and this may serve to alleviate some of its influences, I don’t know how likely it is that we can eliminate all of its power whether it occurs directly or indirectly. This is another major point of link between what I’ve learned from this project and the class itself. There may not be a direct causal relationship between what we see in media and what our behaviors and actions are, but there is definitely some kind of effect that is very difficult to separate from other factors that influence our lives.

Week 5

2008-10-24T04:24:20Z

Leisure in Nature as Commodity and Entertainment

]]> Leisure and entertainment in nature are increasingly promoted as a consumption opportunity. When this occurs, it mitigates and clouds our experiences with the natural world. It is clear that today’s marketplace encourages us to think of free time as yet another consumption opportunity and recreation as just another market. It is as if people can’t enjoy leisure activities without the assistance of material goods and purchasing things that ultimately should be incapable of being bought or sold – for example camping outdoors. It is almost absurd to note that some campsites even offer free wireless internet now. People continue to spend a great deal of income on leisure-time purchases and even companies promoting environmental causes and fair working conditions ultimately promote consumption. For example, Patagonia a outdoor equipment and clothing retailer uses short narratives and stories throughout its catalog to “work around any guilt related to consumerism�? (Corbett, 111). Corbett also points out that the models are thin, handsome, and happy; the nature backdrops are sublime. Just as we are taught by relentless advertising methods that we should view females in a certain way, I think this shows that we are even trained in the ways we think about nature. I know I personally would have to admit I am a sap for the messages in many of these catalog essays (specifically REI) that suggest I can leave my regular life behind and develop some kind of relationship with nature (by purchasing the right gear, of course). I thought it was interesting that there is a section of this chapter called “The Weather Doesn’t Give a Damn!�? because it points out that forecasts present weather as a phenomenon that’s anthropocentric, to be controlled, and with which we connect most strongly through consumption and leisure. We base many activities around this and often personify and blame the weather claiming, “it ruined our weekend�? or “wreaked havoc�? on us. Corbett says the fact remains that “the weather doesn’t give a damn! ‘Mother’ nature doesn’t care whether you want warm sunshine on Saturday, or snow at Christmas�? (115). There are ads for specific weather related conditions like socks during cold snaps and nasal sprays during allergy reports.
In other instances of the “hybrid consumption�? linked to nature, places like Disney World that promote fantasy lands and land pavilions with fake although lifelike nature scenery all promote fusing of consumption items. This includes food, drink, merchandise, entertainment and lodging all in one location so people will stay longer and spend more. Creating a “destination�? has been utilized by casinos, cruises, theme parks and shopping malls as a means of getting people to do this. One example that comes to my mind is the Rainforest Café where you can eat, enjoy the scenery of real fish swimming behind tanks right next to the table, enjoy the technologically created “atmosphere�? of the rainforest, sometimes see real animals like snakes, take picture with the fake ones and buy a whole slew of rainforest related merchandise all in the same place. Despite all of the commodification regarding nature, sometimes it is difficult for people to remember that leisure also provides us with many things that ultimately are incapable of being bought or sold: peace, relaxation and spirituality.

Week 4

2008-10-16T23:27:00Z

Work and Consumer Culture

]]> In today’s world the realms of work and consumer culture seem separate and disconnected. Since we spend most of our work hours inside, it follows that most indoor workers might consider their work largely irrelevant to and unconnected with nature. But it is important to remember that our work is what “buys�? our leisure and Corbett argues that all work intersects with nature though in very different ways. According to sociologist Juliet Shor, since 1948 the productivity of U.S. workers has more than doubled, meaning that we can produce a 1948 standard of living now in about half the time (Corbett, 89). But what happened to all of the extra money we make? We go shopping. By the 1990s the average American owned and consumed more than twice as much as he or she did in 1948, however, we also have less free time. This work-spend cycle becomes increasingly difficult to get away from especially as people try to work more to be able to spend more. This has obvious and detrimental implications for the natural world. The United States has only 5 percent of the world’s population but consumes 20 percent of its natural resources and 25 percent of its energy supply (Corbett, 90). This is more than any other country on earth. Corbett describes this as the development of the “buyosphere,�? a place that is not a civic space, but is our chief arena for expression and the place where we learn most about who we are as people and individuals. In modern society, we are so entangled in consumer culture that it is virtually impossible to leave this space, just as some of the other materials in class portray, the line between advertising and content is becoming blurred to distinction. Advertising and marketing play all-important roles, and privatism (as far as focusing on one’s personal interests and desires is concerned) tends to dominate most people’s thinking and behavior. Also as we discussed in class, Corbett describes the advertising industry as “the destroyer and creator in the process of the ever-evolving new�? (Corbett, 96). Obsolescence of items continues to nurture the condition of consumer dissatisfaction until they purchase a new item. And last, as we recently read in Anna McCarthy’s article, the use of point of purchase can often get people to feel that if they buy a product they too can move up in class. The chapter points to “conspicuous consumption�? of the leisure class as a primary index of its social status and prestige (Corbett, 99). We fail to think about the process of consumption while we focus on the purchase. Most consumers don’t understand where things came from or where they go and this has contributed greatly to our ecological illiteracy. We don’t think about how much of our packaging is waste, because we are focused on the design, style and persuasiveness. Products are either non-usable, can be reduced, reused, recycled or put in the trash. Although many places have the ability to recycle, it’s hardly an institutional ethic. The point is, no job, no matter what level, escapes the environmental consequences of its labor. We might think our distances from it lessens our responsibility, but this dualism can only mean the absence of nature and nature can only mean human leisure so that the both will be poorer. In an example from my own life, I was happy to find a company to work for this past summer that took environmental concerns into account. The company, JohnsonDiversey, actually took pride in taking action to work toward a better environment by making the workplace more efficient. It is a gold standard LEED certified building that uses windows as a source of lights and motion-sensors when necessary, it strives to use environmentally-safe chemicals and although its focus is on earning a profit, it will sacrifice profit when significant issues harming the environment are concerned. All of the employees were educated on the process of product manufacturing and in this way everyone was literate about his or her role in affecting the environment. Hopefully in the future many more companies and institutions will be taking efforts to do something similar.

Week 3

2008-10-10T18:51:34Z

CH 3 “The Links between Environmental Attitudes and Behaviors�?

]]> This chapter explored links between environmental belief systems and the opinions, attitudes, and behaviors derived from them. I learned how to differentiate between the terms “belief�?, “value�?, “attitude�? and “opinion.�?
-Beliefs are assumptions by which we understand things and live our lives
-Values are statements about the way things “should�? be
-Attitudes express a positive or negative evaluation of another person, idea, or entity
-Opinions are a publicly expressed preference
Since the word “environmentalist�? tends to be a loaded word today and is often used to stereotype extremely diverse set of beliefs it is important to come to a better understanding of what it really means. According to the New Oxford English Dictionary, an environmentalist is “a person who is concerned about or seeks to protect the environment, especially from pollution�? (Corbett, 59). This is clearly a very broad definition and explains why such a wide variety of people might identify themselves as environmentalists when in fact they may behave very differently toward the environment. It was interesting to come across a list of demographics that are most closely associated with a concern for the environment. These include being young, female, colored, educated, upper-class, liberal and urban. Some of these results seem counter-intuitive to what kind of person you would think of as an environmentalist as portrayed by the media. I personally would think of an older white man. In order to test your own ecological worldview the most widely accepted test is the New Ecological Paradigm Scale (Corbett, 64). Public opinion polls have found that the majority of Americans support environmental protection, but do they really strive for it? By this decade it is increasingly popular, but still not everyone who says they support it behaves in the same way.
The three most important factors that determine our position are awareness, personal conduct knowledge, and environmental literacy. Why is there still a disconnect between attitudes and behaviors? We are a culture governed by a paradigm based on continual growth and consumption. There are many other factors that influence our attitudes and behaviors such as this. How can we actually demonstrate environmental concern? There are many ways and varying degrees of engagement including environmental activisim (the most intense like monetary donations), nonactivist behavior in the public sphere (writing letters to political leaders), private sphere environmentalism (green consumerism), and actions within organizations to which we belong (designing less packaging for a product). There is no way we can guarantee a person’s behavior, although a person’s values are relatively stable across lifetimes and become important predictors (Corbett, 73). The bottom line is that there isn’t any top-down message to cause people to support environmentalism. We are far too complex social and psychological beings. It does matter, however, what messages are communicated to us. For example, advertisements on TV almost always encourage consumption. Maybe we get a tax rebate for buying energy efficient appliances though. Perhaps a new public transport system is built in our city. Achieving social change in small or large ways must cross and include all levels: individual, societal, cultural and even global.

Week 2

2008-10-03T04:57:23Z

CH 2 “A Spectrum of Environmental Ideologies�?

]]> Before reading this chapter my notion of the term “conservationism�? applying to the environment was that it was one of the more extreme ecocentric ideologies favoring environmental protection. I had no idea that it is actually closer to an anthropocentric belief system and I was unaware of the many other ideologies that exist. The two extreme ideologies I just mentioned lie on a spectrum with anthropocentric (human-centered) on the left and ecocentric (all living and nonliving elements of nonhuman world are intrinsically valuable and important) on the right. In between lie the following ideologies:
Anthropocentricism
Unrestrained instrumentalism (natural world and its resources exist solely for human use)
Conservationism (“Wise use�? and “greatest use for greatest number�? of people)
Preservationism (conserve for scientific, ecological, aesthetic or religious worth)
(Midpoint of spectrum)
Ethics & value-driven ideologies (nonhuman entities have intrinsic value/right to exist)
Transformative ideologies (attempt to find root causes of anti-environmental attitudes)
Ecocentricism
There are subcategories of many of these main principles as well and virtually the entirety of environmental communication in America is taken from the anthropocentric side of the spectrum (which is exactly how I felt after discovered that there was another side of the spectrum). I think the message Corbett wanted to get across in this chapter was that it is difficult for people to discuss environmental ideologies and come to conclusions about what needs to be done to help the environment if we aren’t equipped with the correct understandings that allow us to relate to the natural world. Knowing the full spectrum of environmental ideologies is the first step to understanding where environmental messages are “coming from.�? I have discovered that my ideology lies somewhere between conservationist and preservationist. I believe that building a society requires that we develop and conserve the land’s resources as well as leave some of the wilderness untouched purely to value it for its beauty as well as the valuable information it can give us for scientific purposes like gene pools and undiscovered medicines.
Since I barely knew about the right side of the spectrum and those beliefs closest to ecocentricism I decided to look into the transformative ideology of ecofeminism. Corbett points to the fact that “throughout history, nature has been more identified with the feminine than the masculine�? (47). After exploring an ecofeminist group website (http://eve.enviroweb.org/what_is/index.html) called “ecofeminist visions emerging�?, I read an essay by Catherine Roach which emphasized that the ideology is still struggling to find its definition. Some women felt that a mother-nature relationship empowered them while others felt it should be more about gender equality and not letting a patriarchal view dominate nature. Roach says, “we're all part of nature, some of us are just more aware of our connection.�? Similar to feminist debates in general, there still seems to be some discrepancy on what the ecofeminist view encompasses. The homepage describes it by saying, “although there is no one "correct" ecofeminism, most ecofeminists would agree with the core precept that the domination of women and the domination of nature are fundamentally connected. In other words, violence against Mother Earth came to be intertwined with an emerging urge to subdue and control women.�? Whatever the definition of ecofeminism will become, it was refreshing to realize that there are plenty of ideologies that exist besides what is constantly portrayed in the media.

Week 1 - Introduction and Chapter 1

2008-09-27T00:40:17Z

“Introduction�? and “The Formation of Environmental Beliefs�? from Communicating Nature: How We Create and Understand Environmental Messages by Julia B. Corbett (2006).

]]> Here’s some background information about my book – it lays out the general sequence for what I will be posting about in the weeks to come as well as some of the concepts I found most interesting from the first chapter.
This book was written for an undergraduate communication class at the University of Utah to relate environmental communication to students’ everyday lives. Out actions and practices (including those that are subconscious) send messages about the natural world and our relationship with it, but a great deal of what is communicated about the environment is unrecognized and unstated because we might not recognize that it’s “communication�? at all. Corbett provides the example that roads without sidewalks, bottled water, food served without dishes, big houses, and garbage cans all communicate a meaning which we probably take for granted. Often we have a human-centered or anthropocentric view of nature – like the idea that “parks�? are designed for our leisure. It is important to remember that ecosystems and their inhabitants would unfold and continue without humans and social constructions are just one component of it. Other components include historical and cultural contexts in which we live and the unique sets of individual experience we carry with us. Someone growing up in the city would have a different experience with the environment than someone who grew up on a farm for instance.
Similar to the hegemonic ideology that Gitlin suggests determines our relationship to media, Corbett suggests that all environmental messages have ideological roots that are deep and influenced by individual experience, geography, history and culture. From the news we get about the prices of oil in the Middle East to how we travel to work and what we eat bear a relationship to the natural world. Corbett notes that Americans spend over $8 billion a year on bottled water and many different aspects of communication come into play here. Advertising communicates that bottled water is safer and better than tap water, carries social status, is pure, healthy, and comes from pristine mountain springs. Meanwhile, news stories report that bottled water receives far less testing and is often less pure, not to mention the energy and waste in its distribution and consumption. Today the market for reusable bottles communicates that we can be environmentally friendly while being healthy and displaying our social status at the same time.
The following chapters I discuss will explore the expression of environmental communication that is:
Expressed in everyday practices
Individually interpreted
Historically and culturally rooted
Ideologically derived and driven
Embedded in ideology
Tied to pop culture
Framed and reported by the media
Influenced by social institutions like government and business
How are our environmental belief systems formed? Corbett points to three main factors including childhood experiences, a sense of place, and historical and cultural contexts. Childhood experiences shape our thoughts even if we alter and transform these thoughts later on. Direct experiences (actual physical contact with natural settings) and indirect experiences (structured activities like going to zoos) both influence our thoughts. The idea of what “home�? means to us and attachments to places can provide meanings to environmental spaces. Nature often has a restorative effect and is a place to go for relaxation and time to think, however, if you’ve ever been struck by a natural disaster you might have completely different views. Historical ideology teaches us different things. Native Americans had a harmonious relationship with nature, the first settlers saw nature as a storehouse of commodities available for the taking, Judeo-Christian believers view nature as hierarchical, with God over man, and man over nature.
Through my own experience I’ve come to develop a combination of many of these views. I’ve lived in big cities all of my life and have become accustomed to viewing that, what little land is around is a public environment for all to use and a place for recreational activities. On the other hand, I’ve spent a lot of time on the widely available space on my father’s farm and think of it more as a hideaway from city life. The sense of place I have there is much different from the sense of place I have during the school year. I think it’s important to respect the environment, but I often catch myself contradicting these beliefs when I am too lazy or find it inconvenient to do so, for example supporting the environment by using a reusable bottle, but drinking bottled water if it is offered to me at an event. I hope that by developing a better understanding of nature and how it is communicated I will be able to shape my own thoughts about the environment and discover my impact on the Earth.

Purpose of Honors Project

2008-09-23T00:50:05Z

As an honors project for Journalism 3745: Mass Media and Popular Culture I will be keeping a blog relating to the topic of environmental communication since biological, societal and environmental topics are my area of interest and part of my major.

In order to do this I will be:

1.) Reading Communicating Nature: How We Create and Understand Environmental Messages by Julia B. Corbett.
2.) Keeping a regular blog documenting the most interesting concepts she
discusses plus my thoughts - posting at least once a week on each chapter I read.
3.) Writing a final summary of 4-5 pages applying some of the concepts to
a popular cultural text.
4.) Incorporating any additional materials I come across.

Thanks for reading and stay tuned!