From George Mason University, shifting the message. Note that this is the same university that was shocked at the outcome of their poll on TV weathercasters. Look for this message in the media soon. Confusing weather and climate maybe? People don’t suffer from climate change in a single day, but local weather changes. Cold and flu “season” for example.
When Climate Change Becomes a Health Issue, Are People More Likely To Listen?
New study suggests re-framing the issue helps people better understand and relate to climate problem
FAIRFAX, Va.—Framing climate change as a public health problem seems to make the issue more relevant, significant and understandable to members of the public—even some who don’t generally believe climate change is happening, according to preliminary research by George Mason University’s Center for Climate Change Communication (4C).
The center recently conducted an exploratory study in the United States of people’s reactions to a public health-framed short essay on climate change. They found that on the whole, people who read the essay reacted positively to the information.
Previous research conducted by Mason investigators and others, using people’s beliefs, behaviors and policy preferences about global warming as assessed in a national survey, identified six distinct segments of Americans, termed Global Warming’s Six Americas.
In the current research, 4C director Edward Maibach interviewed approximately one dozen people in each of the Six Americas after they read the brief essay on the human health implications of global warming. As expected, he found that members of the audience segments who already believe strongly that climate change is happening had a strong positive response to the new information, while people who are less sure if climate change is happening also found value in the information. Nearly half of the comments made by members of the “Disengaged” segment, for example, indicated that the essay reflected their personal point of view, was informative or thought-provoking or offered valuable prescriptive information on how to take action relative to climate change. Moreover, about 40 percent of those people in the “Doubtful” segment had similar positive reactions to the essay.
“Re-defining climate change in public health terms should help people make connection to already familiar problems such as asthma, allergies and infectious diseases, while shifting the visualization of the issue away from remote Arctic regions and distant peoples and animals,” says Maibach. “The public health perspective offers a vision of a better, healthier future—not just a vision of an environmental disaster averted.”
The research, which was published in the latest issue of the BioMed Central Public Health journal, also provides clues about specific public health messages that might not be helpful (such as eating less meat) and points to examples or associations that might trigger counter-arguments and negative reactions.
“Many leading experts have suggested that a positive vision for the future, rather than a dire one, is precisely what has been missing from the public dialogue on climate change thus far,” says Maibach. “We believe this survey is one step in shaping a way to talk about climate change that will reach all segments of the public—not just those who already are making behavioral changes.”
A copy of the full study can be found online at: http://www.biomedcentral.com/qc/1471-2458/10/299.
Heh, the first rule of Denier Club is you don’t talk about it.
===============
I forget, is it Climate Change, or Global Warming?
It seems their polling shows people don’t understand what the problem is.
The problem is, the people doing these polls don’t know what problem to make up.
Maybe we should be looking for ways to change the behavior of those at George Mason University pushing this nonsense.
More BS. Message is that if you don’t support or believe them you’re gonna die young. Fear repackaged. Same old, same old.
Nah, this won’t work either. It just makes them look sillier. Everybody knows (according to the Warmers) that weather isn’t climate!
Notice how we feel differently about the same temperature during different times of the year. For example, in mid-summer, 70 degrees feels downright cool. Yet during the wintertime, 70 degrees would feel just fineto most of us. The body has an amazing capability to adapt to temperature (and even to climatic) change, even in a fairly short time span.
I’ve said this before, and I’ll say this again – Maibach, Leiserowitz, Nisbet et al have done much to bring the brand value of climate science down. Let them keep at it. 😉
These people have drunk copiously from the AGW Kool-aid…for example (Appendix 1)
“Global warming can harm people both directly and indirectly. Directly, global warming causes more extreme weather patterns including more frequent heat waves, more violent storms, and rising sea-levels – all of which can lead to people being harmed or killed.”
I don’t know whether to laugh or cry…
Goebbels 6th Principle of Propaganda (Based upon Goebbels’ Principles of Propaganda by Leonard W. Doob, published in Public Opinion and Propaganda; A Book of Readings edited for The Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues) :
“6. To be perceived, propaganda must evoke the interest of an audience and must be transmitted through an attention-getting communications medium.”
Better to be broke when its warm and sunny than when its cold and wet.
Is there a memory hole on this site? I was just reading how “Climate Skepticism Could Soon Be a Criminal Offence in UK” and wanted to compliment you on finding yet more charm and wit from the far right of British politics, and puff, it was gone.
The sample size in their survey is way too small. Six areas at twelve people each? That’s only 72 people. That doesn’t sound like enough to be statistically significant.
If they want to hit the biggest demographic, they might as well play the religion angle.
God said to believe….
…but then that would put them in a catch 22
What a surprising conclusion:
In sum, there was clear evidence that the Alarmed and Concerned segments responded positively to the public health essay, and mixed evidence that the Cautious and Disengaged responded positively. There was no evidence that the Doubtful responded positively. It is worthy of note, however, that all six segments agreed with the essay’s opening frame device (O1) that “good health is a great blessing,” suggesting that human health and wellbeing is a widely shared value.
Nothing says ‘loser’ like trying to rebrand the product.
“Edsel” comes to mind.
If some ideas are stupid, re-framing them tells me they are still stupid.
Is the goal to make us more compliant to tax schemes and penalties?
In America, many of us live indoors. What difference does it make?
Last year Energy secretary Chu said to paint roof tops white. This year no comments on that.
Well, speaking as a newly annointed “Saloon Bar Sceptic” http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1294922/Government-launches-Google-Earth-map-predicts-effects-climate-change.html
a term I actually prefer to “Disengaged”, I can only say that I think Google is factoring in the effects of climate change protagonists hot air too readily.
In vino veritas!
I don’t understand how you stupid skeptics can possibly deny that a 0.6 degree change over 50 years will cause a worldwide health crisis.
/sarc
“George Mason” is where the conservative columnist and sometimes talk show host, Walter Williams, teaches. I think of that University as somewhat conservative in outlook.
Jumping to the paper, we get the statement,
“Our health will suffer if we don’t take action .
Global warming can harm people both directly and indirectly. Directly, global warming causes more extreme weather patterns including more frequent heat waves, more violent storms, and rising sea-levels – all of which can lead to people being harmed or killed. Indirectly, global warming harms the quality of our water, air and food, and our ecosystems, all of which can lead to increasing rates of disease and death. ”
Our ancestors came from Africa, and we’re naturally partial to a warmer climate. A majority of the warming HAS to be at night and during the winter, As to more violent storms in a warmer world, that’s just silly. With more warming at the poles, the
temperature gradient between the poles and equator would lead to LESS violent storms.
As to the disease factor, Malaria is not a tropical disease. The largest malaria outbreak of modern times was in Siberia in the 1920s and 1930s, when 13 million were infected, 600,000 died and 30,000 died as far north as Archangelsk, on the Arctic Circle.
The paper was just silly fearmongering- A. McIntire
New medical term called AGW shortness of breath, kind of makes me sick.
I gagged on the very idea. Maybe I should be gagged on this subject. Maybe the government will gag me anyway as the are wont to do in England.
Spin and marketing….
These increasingly desperate clowns may be deluding themselves but they’re not deluding me…
Why would a university spend money in order to have a Center for Climate Change Communication?
This guy has a great job. Where do I sign up?
What better way to keep the fear-mongering wraith lurching on, like an invasion of the un-dead. All they do is take the well oiled “everything can kill you somehow” BS – spice in global warming as the new spectre and voila – 2 minute heebie-jeebies. Vigilantfish says:
July 19, 2010 at 6:06 am – Previous Post
“will draw on the propaganda and will find other causes if (when) this one fails, but it will be hard for them to find another Trojan horse of such global appeal.” Sorry, Vigilantfish, it appears they have an entire assembly line chugging away.
Desperate people do desperate things.
AleaJactaEst says:
July 19, 2010 at 8:10 am
I like your name, & your point too!
This report suggests to me that straws & clutching seem to be in mind. In the UK we have an expression for interesting news items like these, it begins with b & ends in s, with l,l,o,o,k, & c in between. I’ll leave it to readers to piece it together!
The easiest way to debunk warming as a health issue is to present the annual death graphs for any country with a significant warming trend. Eg the UK.
http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1194947392655
The biggest rise in deaths is during the winter. Trend overall is for less deaths.
There’s also a neat graph that gives rates of influenza like illnesses back to 1988. Note how ILI has risen and fallen inversely to global temperature.
http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1194947381241
It’s probably just a coincidence.