loquasagacious
NCAP Mooderator
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 3,636
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- HSC
- 2004
Basically a couple of friends and I (exciting people that we are) were talking about green politics and the politics of awareness, or more specifically whether awareness politics is worthwhile or even counter-productive.
In my opinion the politics of awareness is based on two primary thought processes among it's proponents. On the one hand there is a genuine belief that the issue involved is of such pressing importance that as soon as people are made aware of it they will act. The other motivation being informed by marketing principles, build brand awareness and people will buy your product.
Awareness politics is the driving force behind many campaigns both Government and non-Government, the campaigns like Earth Hour, Harmony Day, International Women's Day, World Refugee Day and the myriad of other similar events. These campaigns are great for ribbon sales (pink, yellow, orange, white, etc depending on the day) but do they actually achieve anything?
I tend to think not, in fact I feel that 'awareness campaigns' are counterproductive. To look at this we simply divide success into immediate and longer-term. Lets look at Earth Hour:
Immediate Effect: Let's assume that everyone, everywhere, did it. 1 hour. No electricity used. That's a mighty 0.01% reduction in our yearly energy bill. So even if there was 100% compliance, which there never will be, the immediate impact is still not worth talking about.* Similarly if in respect of White Ribbon Day men did not abuse their wives that day it's a 0.27% reduction in yearly abuses.
Obviously it's not about the immediate effect then. The aim is that these campaigns will make people aware of issues which they will then act on themselves. Without awareness there can be no action, without action problems an not be addressed.
It seems to make sense. Except I think that there is a fatal flaw. People perceive the awareness activity as the action. They turn off their lights for sixty-minutes, congratulate themselves for 'doing their bit' and lapse into inactivity on the issue. Wear a white ribbon one day a year, overlook the neighbour who abuses his partner. Wear an orange ribbon one day a year - make racist jokes and discriminate against people the other 364 days.
Participating in awareness events becomes an excuse to do nothing else. In this sense I think they are a counterproductive exercise that fundamentally allow us to feel good about doing bad things. A media-sanctioned catharsis which allows us to assuage our guilt and continue our lives as normal.
Greg Gutfeld: Raise Awareness of Raising Awareness of Raising Awareness!
Anyway apologies for the polemic, what are your thoughts about awareness campaigns?
*And it's impossible to stop power plants for just an hour. So that 0.01% of power is still produced with all the associated pollution.
In my opinion the politics of awareness is based on two primary thought processes among it's proponents. On the one hand there is a genuine belief that the issue involved is of such pressing importance that as soon as people are made aware of it they will act. The other motivation being informed by marketing principles, build brand awareness and people will buy your product.
Awareness politics is the driving force behind many campaigns both Government and non-Government, the campaigns like Earth Hour, Harmony Day, International Women's Day, World Refugee Day and the myriad of other similar events. These campaigns are great for ribbon sales (pink, yellow, orange, white, etc depending on the day) but do they actually achieve anything?
I tend to think not, in fact I feel that 'awareness campaigns' are counterproductive. To look at this we simply divide success into immediate and longer-term. Lets look at Earth Hour:
Immediate Effect: Let's assume that everyone, everywhere, did it. 1 hour. No electricity used. That's a mighty 0.01% reduction in our yearly energy bill. So even if there was 100% compliance, which there never will be, the immediate impact is still not worth talking about.* Similarly if in respect of White Ribbon Day men did not abuse their wives that day it's a 0.27% reduction in yearly abuses.
Obviously it's not about the immediate effect then. The aim is that these campaigns will make people aware of issues which they will then act on themselves. Without awareness there can be no action, without action problems an not be addressed.
It seems to make sense. Except I think that there is a fatal flaw. People perceive the awareness activity as the action. They turn off their lights for sixty-minutes, congratulate themselves for 'doing their bit' and lapse into inactivity on the issue. Wear a white ribbon one day a year, overlook the neighbour who abuses his partner. Wear an orange ribbon one day a year - make racist jokes and discriminate against people the other 364 days.
Participating in awareness events becomes an excuse to do nothing else. In this sense I think they are a counterproductive exercise that fundamentally allow us to feel good about doing bad things. A media-sanctioned catharsis which allows us to assuage our guilt and continue our lives as normal.
#18 Awareness � Stuff White People LikeChristian Lander said:So to summarize – you get all the benefits of helping (self satisfaction, telling other people) but no need for difficult decisions or the ensuing criticism (how do you criticize awareness?). Once again, white people find a way to score that sweet double victory.
Greg Gutfeld: Raise Awareness of Raising Awareness of Raising Awareness!
Anyway apologies for the polemic, what are your thoughts about awareness campaigns?
*And it's impossible to stop power plants for just an hour. So that 0.01% of power is still produced with all the associated pollution.
Last edited: