Mike in California sent me a promising brochure last week published by the California Department of Water Resources. It has a simple straightforward title: “Write about watersheds with courtesy and clarity.”
It’s a strong piece. It has the same basic objective at Water Words That Work: helping experts get more appreciation, respect, and cooperation from the public though the power of clear communications. However, it approaches the goal from a different perspective — focusing on public officials’ habit of using a lot words when only a few will do.
Far and away the best thing about this piece is the “before and after” section, where you can compare some painful bureaucratic gobbeldygook with a plain English alternative. Check it out — it’s very instructive reading.
The only shortcoming is, of course, the title. “Watershed” is simply not a word that works. Sad but true, only about half of Ameircan adults can guess the correct definition on a multiple choice quiz, and only a very few have a deeper appreciation of what the term means.
It’s a common mistake in our circles to try to get people excited about watersheds — something they know nothing about — instead of opening our approach with things they already care about, like clean and healthy water in their faucets and in their local creeks. Or protected natural areas that provide a home for wildlife and help keep their family safe from floods.
Everytime we invoke the word “watershed,” we hide these popular concepts behind a word that most people don’t understand.
Download Write about watersheds with courtesy and clarity. It’s an official recommended resource!
And after you read it, click the comments link below to share your thoughts.
Hello, fellow Water Words readers!
A little background: Eric’s blog serendipitously went live at the same time our organization was considering developing a number of short movies related to water use and watershed management. Needless to say, we’ve found the information very useful. Currently, it is our intention to develop a series of 4-7 minute shorts, each with a different focus, and take them on the road to local rural and urban communities. We intend to partner with a group that travels the province (New Brunswick) during the summer and fall and presents old Hollywood movies in the outdoors. We envisage that each screening will be preceded by one of the short water movies. An individual from our organization will also be present throughout the evening to offer more information and answer questions.
We’re not entirely new to filmmaking but we have never secured funding for this type of venture before. Given that there are likely to be other videographers with similar interests and/or greater experience reading this, I would welcome any comments or suggestions you may have related to funding.
Are there common pitfalls to avoid with this type of project, and what should we consider if requesting assistance from arts and culture bodies (a first for us) as opposed to environmental trusts (our traditional source of project funds)?
Many thanks to Eric for the opportunity to post this request publicly.
Dave Riddell is the Project Manager at the Environment and Sustainable Development Research Centre at the University of New Brunswick in Fredericton, Canada, which works to enhance the understanding and adoption of sustainable development principles through education, outreach, research, and community involvement. Dr. Riddell’s background lies in aquatic ecology, toxicology, and education, and he is currently involved in environmental education regarding impacts to and stewardship of urban and rural watersheds and aquatic habitats.
WEBSITE:
Work: http://www.unb.ca/enviro; Personal: http://daveriddell.byethost4.com
Have you ever tried to have a discussion about an environmental problem, but the conversation kept returning to the taste of tapwater? It might be the words you use.
Citations for this episode
Download this episode to your computer or video iPod
One of the inspirations for Water Words That Work is the Gallup Poll Daily Briefing, where Dr. Newport, editor in chief of the polling firm, narrates the company’s latest findings on a wide variety of topics (Yes, yes, they have a nicer set and fancier graphics than I do). Every year around Earth Day, Gallup does a poll on the environment.
This year, one of the findings they reported is how remarkably steady public opinion and behavior on environmental matters seems to be throughout this decade — despite a huge surge in news coverage around global warming this year.
Check out the trends in the chart above. If you allow for a 3% to 5% margin of error, there’s barely any perceptible motion here at all. How can this be?
One possible explanation is that the public has been losing faith and tuning out traditional print and broadcast news sources for a decade or more. And the result is that even huge surges in news coverage like the one Al Gore kicked off with “An Inconvenient Truth” just don’t have as much influence as they used to. What are Americans doing with those hours they used to spend reading, watching, and listening to the news? Surfing the net, of course.
