Tuesday, October 12, 2010

Pressure on 350.org

October 1st 2010, just days before their planned “global work-day”, environmental action group 350.org denounced a video titled “No Pressure” released on the internet which depicts the fictional violent deaths of schoolchildren and business people unwilling to participate in an effort to reduce carbon emissions.

The video released by the environmental group10:10, shows, in a series of commercial style shorts, several scenes in which authority figures like a school teacher and a business manager ask a group of people if they are willing to help reduce their carbon emissions by ten percent. After the majority of each group has shown it’s support, the same figure asks to see who is unwilling to make any effort prefacing this question with the phrase “no pressure.” In each case only a few of the group members raise their hands in response to the second question at which point the authority figure pushes a button which detonates their bodies spraying blood and entrails across the room. The short film was intended to get the issue of global climate change back into mainstream media with a striking and comical take on what it means not to get involved. However, only hours after the video made its debut on the 10:10 website it was removed and the organization issued an apology to those it had offended.

“With climate change becoming increasingly threatening, and decreasingly talked about in the media, we wanted to find a way to bring this critical issue back into the headlines whilst making people laugh.” Eugene Harvey the director of 10:10 said.

The disturbing video came at a crucial time for 350.org, who, until the release of the video partnered with 10:10. Bill McKibben founder of the organization has been planning a global workday on October 10th 2010, an event nicknamed 10.10.10 for almost a year now. On this October 10th thousands of groups will be joining the effort in their way from putting up solar panels to planting and pruning local trees. The day has gained support from 6,227 independent groups across 185 different countries. The event’s aim as outlined on their website is to send a message to politicians that people really care about climate change and world leaders need to act accordingly. However with the recent release of this gruesome video McKibben is concerned about where the green movement is going and the image it is projecting.

“There’s no question that crap like this will cast a shadow, for a time, over our efforts and everyone else who’s working on global warming.” McKibben said in a response to the video on released on climateprogress.com. “We’re hard at work, as always, but we’re doing it today with a sunk and sad feeling.”

The effects of the video on the actually? workday have yet to been seen. But after publically denouncing the video it seems that 350.org has effectively distanced itself and its associates from the methods behind the video. Furthermore the morale and excitement about the 350.org workday seem to remain undamaged by the video’s release although some are skeptical as to what McKibben’s true feelings on the film are.

“I think when he saw it he was laughing his ass off,” Lou Wright organizer of a student group in New York City said, chuckling. “But he still made the right choice in denouncing it if he wants the work-day to be seen as a legitimate call to arms and hell, I’m still gonna be out there.”

Whether McKibben’s statement is a political move or not is uncertain. Still many have shared his sentiment about the nature of 10:10’s video.

“I was actually nauseas when I saw it.” Sophie Plitt, a volunteer for 350.org’s global workday said, scrunching her brow. “I get that they don’t really want to kill people but it’s a mixed message you know.”

So far there have been no reports of groups dropping out of the workday on account of the video. Whether others had planned on joining and are now unwilling to do so is a valid question. Regardless, the number of groups participating in the workday increases each day, which is a good sign for 350.org and for the environment.

1 comment:

  1. I still feel like you didn't really address the need to identify these groups for readers. I still didnt' really understand who these groups were - you know, where they fit into larger ecological movement. are they fringe? mainstream? radical? student-aimed? we needed some context to understand who we're reading about. Also, in quotes after the first part of the quote: "bla, blah, blah," said so-in-so. NOT "blah, blah, blah." Said so-in-so. Think about it. that makes no sense grammatically.

    basically good. B
    hc

    ReplyDelete