Very important. However, I think it's worth qualifying the effectiveness of radical tactics by noting they are only well suited to very particular contexts.
Shocking ads are a perfect lever to use against luxury products (fast food included) because the visceral reaction costs sales but few people who are upset or angered by them are likely to buy a big Mac in a rage and many people weren't yet polarized about the issue. Same logic for the pics of diseased lungs on cigarettes. Moreover, it was a context where very important wins (adoption of new welfare policies) could happen very quickly before acclimatization and a few brokers could offer to stop the campaign if the corporations met some standard.
But almost all those considerations go in the other direction with climate change. In this context the shocking actions tend to be pretty harmful. It's harder to connect carbon usage to shocking images, the big wins are all in government action so backlash is a big concern and happen over time frames than can easily result in desensitization or giving up. The truly significant corporate emitters have carbon as a core buisness model so no compromise can be reached and so on.
Very important. However, I think it's worth qualifying the effectiveness of radical tactics by noting they are only well suited to very particular contexts.
Shocking ads are a perfect lever to use against luxury products (fast food included) because the visceral reaction costs sales but few people who are upset or angered by them are likely to buy a big Mac in a rage and many people weren't yet polarized about the issue. Same logic for the pics of diseased lungs on cigarettes. Moreover, it was a context where very important wins (adoption of new welfare policies) could happen very quickly before acclimatization and a few brokers could offer to stop the campaign if the corporations met some standard.
But almost all those considerations go in the other direction with climate change. In this context the shocking actions tend to be pretty harmful. It's harder to connect carbon usage to shocking images, the big wins are all in government action so backlash is a big concern and happen over time frames than can easily result in desensitization or giving up. The truly significant corporate emitters have carbon as a core buisness model so no compromise can be reached and so on.
This is a fascinating and excellent article, Lewis! Thanks for sharing.
Very good, article, thanks !
Thanks for your dedicated efforts, didn't know much about them! Eileen @helpanimalsindia
I very much like your article.
Super interesting and helpful. This inspires me to read up on successful and unsuccessful advocates beyond our movement.