Scientist-moms explore why climate change messaging falls flat | Greenbiz

This article was originally published on Climate and Capital Media. Read here .

When Melissa Burt, an atmospheric scientist at Colorado State University, made a video about the climate crisis, she had pictures of her daughter, Mia.

"He has a light that makes me want to do climate science," said Bert of Camera. As he speaks, a photo of a child appears in the frame - playing in the garden, skiing in the fresh snow, having fun on the beach. "As mothers, we care about the environment in which they grew up. I want to tell you for Mia that I have worked hard to change and improve it. "

What Bert didn't say were "pure zero," "1.5 degrees Celsius," or even "carbon emissions." It's not even about polar bears or ice caps. Climate change is not about politics or terminology, it's about video. Climate change affects us: our neighbors, our schools, our children.

"From a scientist's point of view, we often talk about information, facts, facts," Bert told Climate & Capital. "But half the people don't understand what these events mean."

And events alone do not motivate action.

The video was a presentation video for Mothers of Science , a support group for mothers of scientists working to convey the reality of the climate crisis to other mothers, especially suburban mothers. Since 2018, Science Moms has published ads worth about $ 10 million in several political states. However, it is not a common story about female scientists who come together to educate their mothers. It's the result of months of serious research to answer the Science Moms question, created by a sustainable centralized marketing team: How can we improve climate communication?

The Potential Energy Coalition , a non-profit marketing company behind Science Moms, has reported nearly 1 billion impressions of online advertising targeting different platforms, target audiences and geographies by closely following people's responses.

"We've tested a lot of messages and ads for different groups of people. And we've found that suburban mothers are the most persuasive in rejecting government support or drastic action on climate change, "said Anne-Marie Klein, director general of a potential energy research campaign.

Half of the time, people do not understand what these events mean.

"And more than any other group, when they were exposed and talked about what happened, they said, 'Yeah, I'm totally involved,'" Klein said.

Once the potential force reaches the population target, the next step is to determine how the group will react. For example, they found that the term "carbon emissions" received less attention than "carbon emissions." Similarly, viewers were more supportive of the government's climate measures than they were of a foggy city from a severe storm. In Florida, the public reacts more harshly to the phrase "sea level rise" than to "climate change."

Klein described it as an ongoing exercise in cost-benefit analysis: "If you use the phrase 'zero emissions by 2050', let's say a person can say, 'Well, I see, it's worth 15.' . If you say, "Emissions will halve by 2030," it costs $ 10. If you say "polluter tax", it turns out to be something like $ 4. If you say, "Stop coastal development," it will go even lower.

This method may seem more appropriate for people to buy Nike shoes and Apple watches instead of dealing with climate change. But the truth is that while NGOs and climate-based publications are strong in science, many may need training in the persuasive industry.

"The data show that their messaging has stopped from time to time," said David Fenton, former CEO of Fenton Communications , which manages communications for mothers of science. "They don't reach many people," he said. They think they are there, but they are not. "

Throughout his 40-year career, Fenton has helped create messages for clients such as Al Gore, Nelson Mandela and Yoko Ono. He noted that according to the Yale Climate Communications Study , only half of Americans are "aware" or "concerned" about climate change. A quarter of Americans are either completely indifferent or actively ignored.

Fenton blames this relatively weak public interest on the inability of major environmental groups to communicate with ordinary Americans in the face of the Doomsday threat. He said climate groups are reluctant to invest in traditional marketing on Madison Avenue based on population surveys, focus group data and repetition of general messages.

Instead, they allow science to have its say. "They think, 'I wrote a headline in the New York Times, it changed the world, everyone saw it.' It doesn't work that way. "

Common terms such as "pure zero" and "climate justice" may be noble and well-intentioned, but for most Americans, this is simply unacceptable.

When I say "pollution", a chimney rises in my brain. It's ugly, dirty, horrible. This is a real circle of your brain. But when you say "pure zero", you do not start any circuit. Nobody knows what that means. What is "pure zero" [censored]?

The climate section of the Sierra Club, which has spent about $ 1.8 million on campaign grants for the 2020 election period, includes warning images of wind turbines and rising sea levels. His call for Wall Street to cover investments, electric vehicles and certain parts of the law.

Climate mothers try to keep everything low.

Advertising seeks to reach a scientific consensus on climate hazards. "If all the district doctors told you you had a cancer mole, would you give it up?" Request an ad. "If all the mechanics in town tell you you need a new brake, you'll say, 'No, I'm fine?'

In another ad, the greenhouse effect is described as a "dense coating that retains heat in the atmosphere," a simple and effective analogy that Melissa Bert hopes will become the mainstay.

"I think that by informing them, they can understand the urgency of the problem and talk about it more easily, they can easily talk to other people in their PTA groups, book clubs, wine clubs, wherever they are." . "Both will be."

Bert, an African-American, also hopes to change the mental image of the word "scientist": a white man in a white robe. She remembers her mother after speaking at a panel on parenting and climate change.

"I'm a black mother in New York. I don't think climate change is important to me. I just don't think about it. I understand that this loyal and trustworthy ambassador says it's something to worry about."

However, creating strong slogans and images is only part of the war, says Robert Shapiro, a professor of political science at Columbia University. Opponents of the climate movement, the residual fuel lobby, and its political allies do not accept traditional marketing and prefer to sit at home and fight public opinion.

"If you insist on change, those who oppose change spend more time than those who support it," Shapiro said. "The only thing they have to do is confuse."

Opponents of the climate movement should not deny climate science; This is enough to feel uncertainty in science.

Opponents of the climate movement should not deny climate science; This is enough to feel uncertainty in science. There is no need to convince people that climate change is not important; This is enough to make other questions seem equally important. Shapiro agrees that suburban mothers are a key factor in population choice, but when it comes to influencing their hearts and minds, the responsibility lies with scientific mothers. And propaganda is not enough: mothers of science and their talking points also need the coverage of the mainstream media if the group wants to get out of the ground.

"If they really want to maximize their impact, they have to work on it every week so that people don't get lost on radar screens," Shapiro said. "And it's difficult. It requires resources and planning, and you're competing with other things happening at the same time."

Klein says mothers of science will be really hard. They advertise in 11 ever-changing states, including Arizona, Colorado and Florida, which are already feeling the effects of the warmer world. The videos featuring Bert and his colleagues have been shown on platforms such as Facebook and Vimeo, as well as on major television networks in conjunction with the Advertising Council. Klein added that Science Moms has more than 3,000 media outlets, including full features at the Washington Post and The New Yorker.

To further acknowledge scientists like Bert, it may be enough to bring climate change into the conversation on playground benches and football stands, and with a little chance, change a few votes on election day.