Over the Labor Day weekend, I picked up a copy of the Chincoteague Beacon newspaper, and I spotted something rarer than a healthy Chesapeake oyster: An environmentalist acknowledging that things could be worse:
Thus far, Virginia’s Seaside bays are relatively pollution-free and every effort should be made to retain this status.
Source: Virginia Eastern Shorekeeper, letter to the Chincoteague Beacon, August 27, 2008
The Shorekeeper is recruiting activists to help him fight a pending discharge of treated sewage into these not-yet-so-terribly-polluted seaside bays — and he made an interesting choice. He could have emphasized that overfishing and other problems that plague these bays already, but chose instead to emphasize their relative health. Is that smart?
Social research suggests it might well be… because people are more motivated to keep the good things they have than to try to regain the good things they have lost. Here’s one quote:
Attempts to inspire activism will be more successful when issues are framed in terms of avoiding harmful consequences rather than achieving positive ones. Messages should emphasize the losses that occur as a result of inaction. They are more persuasive than messages emphasizing the positive benefits of action
Source: Engaging Women in Environmental Activism, Recommendations for Rachel’s Network, 2003
Now here’s why this gets tricky. In order to call on citizens to work together to ward off the loss of something they want their children to enjoy, you have to remind them that they have something worth keeping — which means finding something positive to say about the situation now.
Can you do it? Can you find something positive to say about the issue that you are working on? Something that people have now — and would hate to lose?
Subscribe via RSS
Fan Our Facebook Page
Connect on LinkedIn
A scenic, pretty clean river that people can wade in, swim in, boat on, fish from, and explore with their children!