The Save Our Springs Alliance are the guardians of Austin’s Barton Springs, a giant spring-fed pool where families gather to swim, wade, escape the otherwise oppressive summer heat. The alliance’s recent animation provides another example for me to deconstruct about the importance of calling everday citizens’ attention to the future, and the mistake of trying to educate them about the past first.
This video highlights the threat of proposed irresponsible overdevelopment by a big corporation in a natural area that provides clean water to the springs. It has some strong messages, but a weak script overall. Check it out, and then read on.
Like many conservation communications pieces, the filmmakers have buried the lead, meaning they have put the punchline — a crisis, a crossroads — at the end, after a long long long story about the history of the springs. Since the future is always more interesting to everyday citizens than the past, the filmmakers wrote their script basically backwards. They should have raised questions about the future of Barton Springs, the families that enjoy it, and the wildlife that lives there from the opening scene, only later exploring the history of citizens’ prior efforts to make a difference to protect the site.
And it’s too bad, because for those who do elect to sit through the entire video, the payoff at the end is rewarding. I’m particularly fond of the line “I wish I knew the end of this story, but the people of Austin will write the rest.” And there’s a “Help save Barton Springs” link that probably went to some kind of action alert center back when this video was first launched.
Congrats to SOS Alliance for experimenting with animation to make their point. Good luck in your efforts to protect Barton Springs.
Comments
Apparently, from a few moments’ research, it looks like AMD is putting forth a lot of extra effort and money into green-building and sustainability (including an “extensive” rainwater capture program). They make computer chips and would employ hundreds, if not thousands. I would think that SOS Alliance would embrace the opportunity to partner with AMD on making the smallest impact possible as they enrich the community with jobs and charitable donations for the town and scholarships. The concern that critics have about the project “spawning” more developement could be negated as the “critics” get involved with the process, help make and guide decisions, and brainstorm on creative solutions to potential problems.
The “Not In My Backyard” phenomenon coupled with the brain-freezing paradigm that All Corporations Are Evil will kill a community. If you don’t evolve wisely, you will become extinct. The SOS Alliance should find ways to work WITH their “enemy,” AMD, to ensure they are doing everything possible to minimize their footprint; perhaps they could help develop a watershed program with the corporation, have an employee Watershed Watch Team, an annual festival on AMD grounds, a water quality monitoring team, the list is endless. But stop wasting time and resources fighting like this ~ make a concerted effort to think outside the box and change your paradigm…partnership gets so much more done!
Is this a new development? AMD’s campus “lies completely outside the Edwards Aquifer recharge zone,” yet they note that “it is a location that requires proper care.”
AMD is complying with the water quality requirements of SOS and are putting in place special methods for capturing and treating stormwater as well as rainwater. They are aware of and using “the natural geologic topography, soil composition, and native vegetation.”
I have idea why SOS is petitioning and picketing this company so vehemently, painting them as Evil. They really ought to be working with AMD, become and integral and valuable part of the process, even help them set up water quality monitoring stations and watchdog teams. Apparently, even The Nature Conservancy is supporting AMD…can’t open their video clip to see why, but it’s worth finding out.
Whether you agree with the SOS Alliance’s position or not, it’s smart messaging for SOS to label AMD as a corporation.
It’s a word that works, and here’s why: By calling AMD a “corporation,” AMD is subtly but effectively reminding people in the Austin area that AMD is accountable to shareholders who aren’t generally paying close attention to what AMD is doing in any given community.
If SOS had called AMD a “business,” they would subtly be telegraphing that AMD was invested in the community and concerned about its reputation among the locals.
Good companies are “businesses.” Bad companies are “corporations.” That’s just how everyday citizens respond to these words and you should pick and choose which one you use with that in mind.
