It’s often said that we know the solutions to the climate crisis, but the only thing lacking is the political will. I would argue that the only thing missing is the social will. The transition to a carbon-neutral world will require numerous changes and, unless the public understands and feels the urgency, those changes will not be supported or enacted.
We are not even close to the level of public engagement needed. Trump has a 40 percent approval rate while sabotaging the Paris Accord and eliminating environmental protections. Meanwhile, Americans are driving more miles than ever and sales of SUVs and pickups are increasing.
Even among those who accept the science, too many are waiting for others — politicians, scientists or entrepreneurs — to “fix” the problem.
How do we convince the American public of the need for immediate and forceful action? While there have been numerous efforts to educate the public, these have mostly been preaching to the choir. The climate message needs to reach a much wider audience. Fortunately, the tools for this are available, as are models for utilizing those tools.
For years, advertising and marketing professionals have been effective in the art of persuasion. It should be self-evident that advertising works; if not, we wouldn’t see so much of it and companies wouldn’t pay large sums for it. Elections are often won or lost based on the quantity and content of political ads. Advertising works, largely because the audience is exposed to the messages without choosing to do so.
A model for the climate message could be the anti-smoking campaign, called The Truth, communicated via public-service messages on TV, radio, magazines and billboards. A modern campaign would also utilize the internet and social media.
Advertising is effective when the messages are seen repeatedly across a variety of platforms and in attention-getting and engaging ways. The goals of this campaign would be to educate the public, elicit an emotional response, show solutions, and present a positive vision of what a carbon-free world could look like.
The ads would need to address the many myths and misconceptions about climate change: action on the climate crisis will not wreck the economy; is not an excuse to expand the federal bureaucracy; and recent extreme weather events are not part of earth’s natural cycle of change.
Much of the past climate messaging has had a tone of scientific objectivity, but ads that elicit an emotional response will be more effective. Fear can be a powerful motivator for action and there are good reasons to be afraid of a future with unchecked global warming. When faced with an overwhelming problem about which the individual has little control, a natural response is to do nothing — but individual and collective action can make a difference.
A media campaign on the climate crisis can also impact elections, as this issue differentiates many Republican from Democratic candidates. Rather than funding multiple campaigns, a nationwide climate campaign that awakens the general public to this emergency would benefit all progressive candidates while simultaneously holding political deniers and obstructionists accountable.
The goals of the Truth anti-smoking campaign were straightforward — stop smoking or don’t start — but the goals of a climate campaign are more complex. Advertising alone will not be sufficient. The ads should end with a catchphrase that directs the audience to a website that would provide details about the science and suggestions for appropriate responses.
In addition to political activity (e.g., voting, letters to Congress) and individual responses (e.g., driving less, shifting diet, recycling), I believe there should be an emphasis on local and community actions, as these would promote values that are shared by Americans on both sides of the partisan divide. Regional differences make it difficult for laws and regulations to dictate a one-size-fits-all approach to reducing greenhouse gases and these are often best addressed on a local level.
Clearly, such a comprehensive campaign would be very expensive, but the costs are minimal as compared with those of global catastrophe. I don’t believe half-measures will be effective. Implementation of a climate campaign with the level of expertise needed will require the collective efforts of the many environmental organizations, businesses, and individuals who are appropriately alarmed about this looming crisis. At present, these efforts are fragmented but working together on this campaign would provide a cohesive focus and set of goals that could make all the difference.
As Lincoln famously said, “With public sentiment, nothing can fail; without it, nothing can succeed.”
Joe Silverman lives in Florence.