Content uploaded by Sheldon Ungar
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Sheldon Ungar on Apr 10, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
A preview of the PDF is not available
Knowledge, Ignorance and the Popular Culture: Climate Change Versus the Ozone Hole
Abstract
This paper begins with the "knowledge–ignorance paradox"—the process by which the growth of specialized knowledge results in a simultaneous increase in ignorance. It then outlines the roles of personal and social motivations, institutional decisions, the public culture, and technology in establishing consensual guidelines for ignorance. The upshot is a sociological model of how the "knowledge society" militates against the acquisition of scientific knowledge. Given the assumption of widespread scientific illiteracy, the paper tries to show why the ozone hole was capable of engendering some public understanding and concern, while climate change failed to do so. The ozone threat encouraged the acquisition of knowledge because it was allied and resonated with easy-to-understand bridging metaphors derived from the popular culture. It also engendered a "hot crisis." That is, it provided a sense of immediate and concrete risk with everyday relevance. Climate change fails at both of these criteria and remains in a public limbo.
... Perceptions and attitudes toward CC seem to depend more on the social construction of uncertainties than on scientific uncertainties (Dunlap and McCright 2015;Rakoen, Anseel, and van der Linden 2020;Sander et al. 2019). CC has been described as a future-oriented issue that lacks bridging metaphors and "anchoring concepts" necessary to understand the links between present events and CC consequences (Sheldon, 2000). Therefore, following Ungar (2000), people tend to rely on a simplified "mediated knowledge" of CC with a consequent "de-monopolization" of knowledge upon which scientists have limited control. ...
This conceptual paper reviews four dimensions of the climate change (CC) debate concerning perception, framing, and political and economic dimensions of CC. It attempts to address the question posed by sociological research as to what can be done to reduce the social forces driving CC. In doing so, it attempts to uncover mechanisms that delay or prevent the social change required to combat CC. Such mechanisms call into question the Ecological Modernization Theory's assumption that modern societies embrace environmental sustainability with no radical intervention to change the social, political, and economic order. It specifically considers how the representation of CC as a distant phenomenon, in both temporal and physical terms, might contribute to social disengagement. A reflection on the interdependencies among science, political economy, media, and individual perceptions guides this paper. All these social forces also shape the CC discourse in diverse ways according to the evolution of the phenomenon over time (in scientific, but also in political and economic terms) and in relation to its spatial dimension (global/national/local). The variety of climate discourses contributes to increasing political uncertainty; however, this is not the only factor that generates confusion around the CC. Multiple and contrasting information might trigger a “blaming/empowering game” that works at various levels. This mechanism simultaneously promotes the necessity for sustainable development and perpetuates “business as usual‐oriented” practices. Implementing sustainable development is therefore constantly undermined by a difficulty in identifying “heroes” and “devils” in the context of CC.
... Instead of having to explain a complex physical theory first, Bryson was able to make an immediate, comprehensible, and visual impact on his non-specialist audience ( fig. 1). 4 Very early in his testimony, Bryson was already implying climatological predictions, claiming that temperatures had started to decrease in the Northern Hemisphere in 1940 and were likely, via historical precedent, to continue decreasing for at least four decades. Bryson then gently began to 4 The ability to visualize climate change forms an important part of modern climate change literature (Ungar 2000;Mahony and Hulme 2012). Bryson's testimony shows us the power of visualization was utilized very early on in climatic change discourse. ...
Argument
During the first half of the 1970s, climate research gained a new significance and began to be perceived within political and academic circles as being worthy of public support. Conventional explanations for this increased status include a series of climate anomalies that generated awareness and heightened concern over the potentially devastating effects of climate change. Controversial climatologist Reid Bryson was one of the first to publicly promote what he saw as a definitive link between these climate anomalies and unidirectional climate change in the fall of 1973, and rising food prices in the same year gave him a platform on which to air his views to receptive senior members of the US Congress. Bryson’s testimony before a US Senate subcommittee offers a unique glimpse into how he was able to successfully resonate his agenda with that of senior politicians in a time of crisis, as well as the immediate responses of those senior US politicians upon first hearing climate change arguments. Bryson was one of the most prominent US climatologists to break a taboo against making bold climatological predictions and de-facto policy recommendations in public. As a result, although Bryson was criticized by many in the climatological community, his actions instigated the involvement of other scientists in the public arena, leading to an important elevation in US public climate discourse.
... Second, research has shown that the link between public awareness about climate change and behavioral responses is not straightforward. Rising awareness and changing peoples' attitudes is not enough to generate behavior change (e.g., Blake, 2001;Ungar, 2000). In psychology, this phenomenon is commonly known as the "attitude-behavior" gap. ...
In this chapter, we shed some light on disruptive communication across cultures. We explain differences between so called WEIRD and non-WEIRD populations, especially in regard to behavioral predictors. Subsequently we point toward important considerations, limitations, and conceptualizations such as the Culture-Person-Situation model which provides a useful framework when attempting disruptive communication in intercultural settings. The focus in this chapter lies on the distinction between disruptive and destructive communication. Disruptive communication is meant to be a first shocking but then positive lever for change, while destructive communication can lead to harmful effects within parts of the to the target audience. The potential negative consequences of destructive communication imply the need to tailor or, ideally, co-develop, communication approaches to different audiences, especially when working with marginalized groups, such as communities in the Global South. The chapter also introduces practical examples for disruptive communication across cultures, for example, through future scenarios. In addition, four selected case studies illustrate concepts described in the chapter, giving us some insights into firsthand experiences of disruptive communication around the world. The chapter concludes with suggesting an extension of the original definition of disruptive communication with the concepts of intentionality and applicability.
... Second, research has shown that the link between public awareness about climate change and behavioral responses is not straightforward. Rising awareness and changing peoples' attitudes is not enough to generate behavior change (e.g., Blake, 2001;Ungar, 2000). In psychology, this phenomenon is commonly known as the "attitude-behavior" gap. ...
This chapter conducts an analysis of psychological mechanisms explaining why individuals and societies often are resistant to change and how these mechanisms might respond when confronted with disruptive communication. We will explore concepts like habits and routines, stabilizing social norms and values, lock-in situations, mechanisms behind status quo biases, and social identity. Then, we apply the concept of disruptive communication developed in Chap. 1 through each concept where potential levers for breaking up locked-in lifestyles can be found. We conclude with a discussion, under which circumstances disruptive communication might have negative effects on sustainable change making and refer these back to some of the identified mechanisms and concepts.
This chapter identifies four main themes in the literature on media communication of climate change, which represent an interesting object of analysis for scholars who focus on moral panics' application. The combination of both the processual model and the attributional model to interpret the results of this literature review shows that during its emergence, climate change was polarised between “advocates” and “deniers” of both its existence and anthropogenic causes. This division has progressively shifted towards the consequences of climate change and need for action against it. Two distinct moral panics are identified. One is rooted in sceptical arguments and seems to work “in reverse” by emphasising the “uncertainty” around the phenomenon and its impacts. A second one is triggered by climate change supporters, who emphasise that climate change threatens life on the planet and that the current social practices need regulation and control.
Although the significs movement that Victoria, Lady Welby (1837–1912) inspired was dedicated to better understanding meaning, she has largely been forgotten by analytic philosophers of language. Significs was to educate “the great world of hearers and the growing world of readers” to better interpret science and philosophy, evincing a focus on the audience for intellectual activity that it remains vital for academics to consider. Her arguments that the metaphorical associations of terminology are part of their significance for others also pertain to contemporary programs of conceptual engineering which seek to craft and stipulate the meaning of terms. Welby would prefer, I contend, P. F. Strawson’s connective model of analysis, in which the aim is neither to replace nor reduce our concepts, but rather to carefully describe their interrelations. Connective analysis, she would argue, encourages us to keep others, rather than ourselves, firmly in view. I close by turning the lens afforded by Welby’s suggestions for educational reform upon the way we might best communicate philosophical ideas throughout society.
Virtual reality and more specifically immersive virtual reality and experiences are a growing field. In this chapter, we explore the potential that lies in these technologies for creating disruptive experiences that change people’s ways of thinking and doing. Based on an analysis of why wicked environmental problems like climate change are hard to communicate to people and trigger engagement, we discuss how immersive virtual experiences might be an alternative approach. We describe what characterizes such experiences and outline examples on how the new opportunities arising from this technology can be used in disruptive communication, communication to stimulate mitigation of and adaptation to climate change effects, and even to create connectedness to nature.
The need for effective communication, public outreach and education to increase support for policy, collective action and behaviour change is ever present, and is perhaps most pressing in the context of anthropogenic climate change. This book is the first to take a comprehensive look at communication and social change specifically targeted to climate change. It is a unique collection of ideas examining the challenges associated with communicating climate change in order to facilitate societal response. It offers well-founded, practical suggestions on how to communicate climate change and how to approach related social change more effectively. The contributors of this book come from a diverse range of backgrounds, from government and academia to non-governmental and civic sectors of society. The book is accessibly written, and any specialized terminology is explained. It will be of great interest to academic researchers and professionals in climate change, environmental policy, science communication, psychology, sociology and geography.
The need for effective communication, public outreach and education to increase support for policy, collective action and behaviour change is ever present, and is perhaps most pressing in the context of anthropogenic climate change. This book is the first to take a comprehensive look at communication and social change specifically targeted to climate change. It is a unique collection of ideas examining the challenges associated with communicating climate change in order to facilitate societal response. It offers well-founded, practical suggestions on how to communicate climate change and how to approach related social change more effectively. The contributors of this book come from a diverse range of backgrounds, from government and academia to non-governmental and civic sectors of society. The book is accessibly written, and any specialized terminology is explained. It will be of great interest to academic researchers and professionals in climate change, environmental policy, science communication, psychology, sociology and geography.
Drawing on the sociology of moral panic, this paper argues that the media will shift from alarming to reassuring coverage when a 'hot crisis' portends a possible grass root panic. To determine whether this moderation effect follows from dread-inspiring events that are developing in unpredictable and potentially threatening ways, the paper compares newspaper and magazine coverage of emerging diseases with their coverage of Ebola Zaire. The results reveal that the mutation-contagion package, with its frightful account of emerging diseases, was quickly abandoned and subverted during the Ebola epidemic. In its place, the media fashion a containment package that uses a strategy of 'othering' to allay the fear. The conclusion discusses the flexibility in the tool kits used by the media to frame events.
