I’m sure there’s some way to improve the cover of this booklet from the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, but I can’t think of it offhand. Can you?

And the use of images is generally strong throughout the piece. Check out these winners:

Simple rules worth repeating:

• Family and children are words that work!
• A picture is worth a thousand words!
• Pictures of people enjoying the outdoors together are much much much better than pictures of people enjoying the outdoors alone!
• If you want minorities to feel included, you have to show pictures of them.

Click here to download the complete booklet.

I’m dimly aware of an issue before Congress that some of you are working on: The Clean Water Restoration Act. A story in the Washington Post yesterday reminded me of it. If you’re involved in any issue advocacy, this post is for you. Here’s the key quote from the Post story:

In the past five years, 44 percent of Americans — about 100 million people — have contacted their elected representatives in Washington. Most of them did so at the prompting of a third party — often a lobbying group — according to surveys done for the Congressional Management Foundation.

However, other social research (admittedly using different methodologies) usually pegs the number of Americans who recall contacting elected officials about nature protection and pollution control at only 10% to 20%. Yikes!

Why is that? I think the key phrase here is that most citizens who write Congress “did so at the prompting of a third party.” That means somebody like you called them on the phone, mailed them a letter, or sent them an email saying “please write your Senator” about this important issue.

Which is exactly what the good folks at Clean Water Action are up to right now, trying to close a loophole in the Clean Water Act. Let’s check out their pitch to their members:

The Clean Water Act was passed in 1972 to protect all the nation’s waters. However, the Bush Administration, at the urging of special interests, has interpreted the law to apply only to some bodies of water. This is not what the law intended or what the American people want…Many waters are at risk. Some of these waters and wetlands are homes for birds, fish and waterfowl, filter pollutants and/or reduce flooding. Now is no time to abandon three decades of progress restoring and protecting America’s waters.

Source: Clean Water Action petition

I won’t mince my words here: that’s as about as motivating as an abstract in the Journal of American Limnology. Let’s try that again with some punch — using water words that work:

The Bush presidency has always been accountable to polluters, and recently they gave their corporate sponsors a handsome present — a giant loophole in the clean water and nature protection laws that help keep you and your family safe from pollution and floods. But it’s not too late for you to make a difference about this. Tens of thousands of Americans are working together to stand up for strong, fair laws that protect citizens like you. Won’t you please join us? Write your Senator today and tell them that you want future generations of Americans to enjoy clean water, healthy wildlife populations, and natural areas they can enjoy with their families. Ask your Senator to support pending legislation (S.1870) that would reverse the Bush administration’s irresponsible actions.

Now… my rewrite may make you lobbyists out there wince, but here’s the key question — which of those two approaches will get more people to actually write Congress?

The good folks at Georgia Forest Watch wonder what you think about this poster. They’ve got it on display at Patagonia in Atlanta, where they’re competing for a nice $4,000 grant. I don’t know what the other groups have on display, so we’ll have to evaluate this one on its own merits. So weigh in — would you vote for them? If not, why not?

Thanks to Lori, the group’s outreach director, for volunteering her work!

Check out these ads, which reveal a great deal about different attitudes that polluters and conservationists bring to the task of persuading the public.

Social research consistently find that corporations, especially those in the fossil fuel business, have a serious credibility gap with the public. So what do they do? They work hard to put the best face possible on their business — your face. Polluters create ads that use pictures and words to tell heartwarming stories that link their business to everyday citizens’ families and children. And then they get feedback from everyday citizens before they run them, just to make sure they got it right. Check out the faces in these two examples:

Source: EnergyTomorrow Coalition

Social research consistently finds that nature protection and pollution control experts enjoy pretty good credibility with everyday citizens on our business. So what do we do? We create cryptic, sterile ads that portray the environment as remote and impersonal. We skip the step of getting feedback everyday citizens and run the ads after our peers approve them. And then we wonder why ads like the one below don’t seem to make much difference in a public policy debate:

Bottom line here: Polluters do it better because they try harder. And that’s one of the reasons they can overcome their credibility gap and beat us on vital policy matters.