Public relations over public good

-

I'm moved by the new Cadbury ad. After all, who wouldn't? It combines nostalgia with gender empowerment, with cricket being the deified cherry on top. There is no doubt that the folks at Ogilvy are brilliant at what they do. And I'm certainly not the only one who thinks so.

 

 

Unfortunately, I'm also very conflicted about the ad, because the creator's name - Ogilvy - takes me back a different memory lane. About two decades ago, the IPCC released it's Third Assessment Report (please, bear with me, I will not bore you with science this time). In contrast with the cautious phrasing of the previous reports, the Third Assessment Report said it quite clearly: it wasn't natural variability, it was human influence that was causing the climate to change.

 

 

The anti-climate narrative before this had focused on our inability to identify climate change -- "Is the climate even changing?" -- and our (reasonable?) incredulity over the effect of our activities -- "Could the global climate even change due to us mere mortals?"

With this report, those questions were answered. Naturally, the next question that would arise would be -- "So who is causing all these greenhouse gas emissions?". And the focus had to be shifted very urgently away from the fossil fuel industry.

In 2004, the oil giant British Petroleum commissioned PR firm Ogilvy and Mather to formulate their "Beyond Petroleum" campaign. Through this campaign, they promoted the use of the "carbon footprint" - the impact your (and my) daily activities have on the climate. Julie Doyle, a professor of media and communication at the University of Brighton, suggests that this was designed to "assign responsibility for climate impact to the individual", thus taking focus away from the fossil-fuel industry. Very convenient for anyone with a disproportionate impact on the climate.

The brilliance of Ogilvy helped delay meaningful climate action for decades. The term "carbon footprint" has stuck with us, keeping us busy with our own guilt. So busy that we failed to notice that none of the fossil-fuel giants shared this guilt with us. So busy that we failed to notice which of our media outlets amplified fossil-fuel propaganda, and which reported fairly on climate change. So busy that we failed to notice which of our policymakers and political leaders have the understanding, intent and the spine to propose real and impactful climate solutions in the form of systemic changes.

This was in 2004, when climate solutions could have been more gradual and hence, easier on society. The graph below shows two pathways - with climate solutions beginning in 1990 and in 2021. The reader can imagine a middle one, with climate solutions beginning in 2004, or maybe even a few years later ไธ€ if BP and Ogilvy had not distracted us.


 

So does my carbon footprint not matter?

It does. But it becomes a truly effective tool only when you also keep in mind that your individual choices are not enough to restrain climate change. Heck, your individual choices may not even be enough to change your own carbon footprint by more than in a decimal place! I recommend giving some thought to your individual choices as a precursor to getting involved on a collective scale. Making some alterations to your lifestyle helps appreciate the complexity and the scale of the problem. It helps make the problem more personal ไธ€ something that may not be otherwise imminent, depending on your luck or privilege.


So what's the point of this post?

I'm wishing the reader appreciates three important takeaways:

(1) Climate change is a highly politicized and propaganda-ized (what's a better word?) issue. The science behind the problem as well as the solutions are actually quite clear. The only way to avoid hurting the profits of those most culpable is to distract from these solutions. A good counter-strategy would be to stay diligently focused on the science, engineering or economics that provide solutions.

(2) I find the climate narrative, at least in India, to be rife with the wrong "us vs them" narrative. I want to refer to a study by an MIT class. Though dated and simplistic, the conclusion it reaches remains correct and relevant: that we're all inexorably wed to the climate emissions from our public infrastructure. This is as true in India as it is in the US. This study found that even a homeless and destitute American would have a carbon footprint higher than the global average. Would you hate them for their lifestyle?

The rift is not between the West and the East. The rift is between pro-fossil-fuel and anti-fossil-fuel, or more holistically, climate believers and climate deniers. Here, I use the term climate deniers to include all those who are not committed to curbing climate change: whether it be suave skeptics, blatant deniers or sneaky delayers. Indians need not look only towards the West for such anti-climate-solution aggressors, there are numerous examples within our own country and systems.

(3) When I was growing up, I often heard people say, Videsh mein kuchh aaya hai toh bees saal baad yahan aayega. I don't know how accurate this is in light of climate propaganda, but I'm convinced that there is tremendous benefit in learning how climate solutions have been delayed in other parts of the world ไธ€ and then ensuring the same tactics do not work in our own country. This is not to save the world or become a champion of some sorts, this is to save our very own selves.


To conclude

The older Cadbury ad has been described as iconic. Also made by Ogilvy, perhaps it did change Indian advertising (I wouldn't know). But I do know that other Ogilvy ads have changed much more of the world, unfortunately, irreversibly.

I don't know whether to hate on Ogilvy or not. As Ben Tallon puts it, "I have no way of truly knowing whether Ogilvy innocently and naively bought into whatever greenwashing BP used to present the carbon footprint campaign as a benevolent, important step towards addressing climate change, or saw BP at the door and knew exactly what kind of payday this meant, despite the ethical implications of accepting the role of mouthpiece for such a company."

Of course, I'm tempted to make connections, such as between Ogilvy helping Vedanta rebuild its image a couple of years after it was found violating green norms. I'm also tempted to extrapolate that after the PR industry has helped the tobacco and the beverage industries, it would naturally help fossil fuel giants as well. After all, they have money too, don't they? And finally, I'm tempted to interpolate between the connections that certain Indian fossil fuel firms have with our political leaders, the influence these firms have over Indian media, and the emergence of electoral bonds ไธ€ the transactions of which must remain opaque to all of us who vote.

However, I recognize that Indian firms cannot be held accountable for the work of their foreign counterparts. Moreover, making these links authoritatively would require immense and meticulous work, such as that by Ben Franta, or Supran and Oreskes. I am left wishing that such work would happen in the Indian research landscape too .. or if it does exist, that the reader would point me to it.

Till then, I must go back to my work in climate science, which will remain futile as long as the fossil fuel industry's PR works. But I can not help but wonder what the world would have looked like if we had started paying attention to climate solutions when the older Cadbury ad aired. That was 1993, when I had a childhood that the next generation will certainly not have.

ไธ€ไธ€ไธ€ไธ€ไธ€ไธ€ไธ€ไธ€ไธ€ไธ€ไธ€ไธ€ไธ€ไธ€ไธ€ไธ€ไธ€

You can subscribe to such posts here. 

ไธ€ไธ€ไธ€ไธ€ไธ€ไธ€ไธ€ไธ€ไธ€ไธ€ไธ€ไธ€ไธ€ไธ€ไธ€ไธ€ไธ€

Recommendations for similar reading

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

เคนिเคฎाเคšเคฒ เค•ी เค†เคชเคฆा เค”เคฐ เคจाเค—เคฐिเค•ों เคธे เค†เค—्เคฐเคน

-
Image
เคนिเคฎाเคšเคฒ เคช्เคฐเคฆेเคถ เคธे เคเค• เค•े เคฌाเคฆ เคเค• เคญเคฏाเคตเคน เคตिเคกीเค“ เค”เคฐ เคคเคธ्เคตीเคฐें เคธाเคฎเคจे เค† เคฐเคนी เคนैं। เคญाเคฐी เคฌाเคฐिเคถ เค•े เค•ाเคฐเคฃ เค•เคˆ เค•्เคทेเคค्เคฐों เคฎें เคฌाเคข़ เคœैเคธे เคนाเคฒाเคค เคนैं। เค‡เคธ เคธंเคฆเคฐ्เคญ เคฎें เคนिเคฎाเคšเคฒ เคช्เคฐเคฆेเคถ เค”เคฐ เคชूเคฐे เคฆेเคถ เค•े เคจाเค—เคฐिเค•ों เคธे เค†เค—्เคฐเคน เคนै เค•ि เคตे เค‡เคจ เคšाเคฐ เคœ़เคฐूเคฐी เคฌाเคคों เคชเคฐ เค—ौเคฐ เค•เคฐें :   (เฅง) เคฌाเคข़ เค•्เคทेเคค्เคฐीเค•เคฐเคฃ เคฎें เคขीเคฒ เคฆेเคจा เค†เคชเคฆाเค“ं เค•ो เคจिเคฎंเคค्เคฐเคฃ เคฆेเคจे เคœैเคธे เคนै เค…เคฒเค— เค…เคฒเค— เคตिเคถेเคทเคœ्เคžों เคฆ्เคตाเคฐा เคฏे เคฌाเคค เคฌाเคฐ-เคฌाเคฐ เค‰เค ाเคฏी เคœा เคšुเค•ी เคนै, เคชเคฐ เคซिเคฐ เคญी เคจเคœ़เคฐ-เค…เคจ्เคฆाเคœ़ เค•เคฐी เคœाเคคी เคนै। เคนเคฐ เคจเคฆी เค•ा เคเค• เคฌाเคข़-เค•्เคทेเคค्เคฐ เคนोเคคा เคนै เค”เคฐ เค‰เคธ เค•्เคทेเคค्เคฐ เคฎें เคจिเคฐ्เคฎाเคฃ เค•เคฐเคจा เคœोเค–िเคฎ เค•ी เคฌाเคค เคนै। เคช्เคฐเคถाเคธเคจ เค•े เคฆ्เคตाเคฐा เคฌाเคข़ เค•्เคทेเคค्เคฐ เคฎें เคจिเคฐ्เคฎाเคฃ เค•เคฐเคจे เค•ी เค…เคจुเคฎเคคि เคฆेเคจा เค‰เคšिเคค เคจเคนीं เคนै। เคฏे เคจाเค—เคฐिเค•ों เค•ा เคฆाเคฏिเคค्เคต เคจเคนीं เคนोเคจा เคšाเคนिเค, เคฌเคฒ्เค•ि เคฏे เคช्เคฐเคถाเคธเคจ เค•ा เคฆाเคฏिเคค्เคต เคนोเคจा เคšाเคนिเค เค•ी เคจเคฆिเคฏों เค•े เคฌाเคข़ เค•्เคทेเคค्เคฐ เคฎें เค•ोเคˆ เคจिเคฐ्เคฎाเคฃ เคจा เคนो, เค–़ाเคธ เค•เคฐ เค•ोเคˆ เคญी เคธाเคฐ्เคตเคœเคจिเค• เคจिเคฐ्เคฎाเคฃ เคคो เค•़เคคเคˆ เคจा เคนो। เคฌाเคข़ เค•्เคทेเคค्เคฐीเค•เคฐเคฃ เคธे เค•เคˆ เคฒोเค— เคชเคนเคฒे เคธे เคตाเค•़िเคซ़ เคนोंเค—े। เคฏे เคธिเคฐ्เคซ़ เคชเคนाเคก़ी เค‡เคฒाเค•़ों เคฎें เคนी เคจเคนीं, เคชूเคฐे เคฆेเคถ เคฎें เคœ़เคฐूเคฐी เคนी। เค‡เคธเค•े เคฌाเคฐे เคฎें เค”เคฐ เคœाเคจเคจे เค•े เคฒिเค เคฏे เคฒेเค– เคชเคข़ें (เค…ंเค—्เคฐेเคœ़ी เคฎें)। เคฏे เคŸ्เคตीเคŸ เคญी เคœ़เคฐूเคฐ เคฆेเค–ें: เคญूเคตिเคœ्เคžाเคจ เคตिเคถेเคทเคœ्เคž เคจे เคฎเคจाเคฒी เค•े เคเค• เคตिเคกीเค“ เคฎें เคขेเคฐ เคนोเคคी เคนुเคˆ เคฐोเคก เค•ो &qu
Read more

What is a monsoon?

-
Image
Note: This post is written primarily for an Indian audience. - - - What leads to a strong or a weak monsoon? What will happen to the monsoon as the world warms? What happens to the monsoon in an El Niรฑo year? -- These are popular and practical questions that the reader has probably heard, read or thought about. This post has no answers for any of these questions, but instead focuses on a more foundational and theoretical question -- What is a monsoon? Easy! Monsoon means the rainy season, right? This first order approximation is generally accepted as universal truth, since it works for a large part of the country. People equate monsoon with rains, especially summer rains. But what about winter rains? They are usually labelled as "post monsoon", and anything else can be put under "pre-monsoon". If you're a bit more nuanced, you may even label some non-summer rains as "non-monsoon". But the general discussion around rains in India tends to revolve around
Read more

Albedo, and why you should care about it

-
Image
I'm a big fan of albedo . I think this concept is very relevant to the climate system, especially to modern climate change. So this is my attempt to familiarize the reader with this concept and show its practical applicability. What is albedo? In simple terms, it is the ability of a surface to reflect sunlight. A surface with high albedo reflects more sunlight, a surface with low albedo reflects less sunlight. Source There are more general terms, such as reflectance, which are used in other sciences. For the sake of climate, we are primarily interested in sunlight. Albedo values lie between 0-1. The overall, average albedo of the Earth is 0.30. This means that 30% of sunlight is reflected back. The rest is absorbed and radiated as heat. Greenhouse gases tend to trap the radiated heat. In the context of a warming planet, it might have been more comfortable if the Earth's albedo was higher. A higher albedo would mean lesser sunlight would be absorbed, lesser heat would be radiate
Read more