wild places | wild happenings | wild news
make a difference for our wild places

home | links | search the site
  all articles latest | past | articles by topics | search wildnews
wild news on wildsingapore
  BBC 28 Aug 07
Time to tune in to the real world
Joanna Benn

People are more interested in reality TV than the real world, says Joanna Benn. In this week's Green Room, she argues that environmental groups find it hard to compete for attention in a celeb-obsessed age.

As a communications manager for WWF, it astounds me how hard it is to explain environmental issues.

We're either accused of being scaremongers or boring people to death. Why is there no middle ground?

Now, I know it is not possible to please all the people all of the time, but surely everyone should have an interest in the wellbeing of our environment. After all, it gives us air to breath, food to eat, freshwater to drink; it even affects our ability to make babies.

And these are just the areas that are relevant for the average man or woman in the street.

The more self-consciously "green" and "socially aware" among us cannot even buy a bar of chocolate or a cup of coffee without endlessly pondering the effects of chemicals used to grow ingredients, or the impact on local communities that harvest the beans.

Getting a grip

So why is it hard to get the message across to a wider audience? Is it that there's too much bad stuff going on and actually it's easier to switch off and watch Big Brother than think about the rate of extinction?

In case you don't know, the current rate of species extinction is at least 100-1,000 times higher than the expected natural rate.

Still reading? Or are you toying with the idea of clicking on an entertainment story yet?

How about this? In the time is takes you to read this article, one of our planet's unique species will have become extinct.

Or this: by this time tomorrow, a further 150-200 will have disappeared forever. By this time next year? More than 50,000 species will have been consigned to history.

Yes it is depressing, but it's also true.

So, should we just slope off and watch "reality" TV or grab a glossy magazine because it's fun to have a nose around the homes of the rich and beautiful? Who wants to hear about the worsening state of our planet, day in, day out?

Or should we get to grips with the awful state of our world, get off our backsides and stop ignoring what's really happening?

I really don't think of myself as a rebel leader, yet I can't seem to help ranting at dinner parties about overfishing, depleted resources and the hundreds of thousands of turtles that get caught and often killed on fishing hooks each year - often just as the host wheels out the prawn cocktail.

The pattern is predictable. Most people say "that's terrible, awful, scandalous", and notably "I didn't know about that, why aren't people publicising this?"

This makes me feel wholly inadequate because it's my job to communicate environmental issues.

So, why don't we know what's going on in the world? Here are some of my theories:

* When you browse a website or pick up a newspaper with a catastrophe environmental headline, are you just looking to be educated about the issue? Knowledge is a great thing - but if we don't offer practical easy solutions, my feeling is that most people just switch off.

* Environmental policy can be confusing and complicated. And that makes telling the real story and what needs to happen in today's soundbite age very difficult. Often there are no easy pat answers.

* There is a bias in the stories that do get picked up because news values dictate what's "interesting" to the reader rather than what environmentalists may see as the current priority.

* People don't like ongoing bad news, that's obvious. Who wants to hear about the worsening state of our planet, day in, day out?

* Environmental groups have to safeguard their scientific credibility and relationships with governments and communities, often in carefully couched language.

It's valid and understandable, but can mean organisations are forced to hide behind jargon or institutional wording that means little to the outside world.

People who work on environmental issues often fall into two camps.

In the first camp are those who think everything they work on is fascinating - but who can really make plant databases, fish stocks or carbon trading interesting all the time?

In the other camp are the people who work on exciting issues but don't realise it.

Here is a recent example: "I have a meeting about Prunus Africana", said one member of our delegation at a recent wildlife trade meeting.

Now, perhaps I would've sat up and taken more notice if he'd have said: "I have a meeting about an amazing tree. It's found in Africa and is used to treat chest pain, malaria and fevers. Mostly it's traded on the international market for products used to treat enlarged prostate glands."

Apparently, prostate enlargement affects more than 50% of men over the age of 50.

Perhaps by making our environment and its future more relevant to our everyday lives, we'll start having heated conservations in the Big Brother household about who's left the tap on, where to buy organic produce and what we can do to stop the destruction of our planet - rather than just about who's sleeping with whom.

Joanna Benn is communications manager for WWF International's species programme

The Green Room is a series of opinion pieces on environmental topics running weekly on the BBC News website
links
Related articles on Global environmental issues
about the site | email ria
  News articles are reproduced for non-profit educational purposes.
 

website©ria tan 2003 www.wildsingapore.com