Climate Change from a Marketing Perspective

Our ability to analyze and model the earth’s climate is simply amazing.  Since the 15^th century, we have strived to make sense of what is happening to the planet. In 18^th century, meteorologists traveled the world to figure out ways to collect data and maintain accuracies. The 19^th century brought us the standardization of temperature recordings, implementation of computerized modeling, the beginning of a physical model of the earth, and of course views from space. The question remains, how do we go about communicating all of this to the 21^st century? How do we paint the big picture for the world to see? Do we minimalize the strenuous equations for the sake of public understanding? Or do we strive to educate the public more and more? The fact is that climate “deniers” have succeeded in telling history a completely different way.

            First, I believe we have to do better marketing in the advertisement industry. We have to outline the non-political truths about climate change.  Use real time evidence of change and real human impact other than the polar caps melting. It is clear that advertising of another region in ruins is started to fade as we see technology detach human emotions. Neat things like showing how carbon dioxide works in the atmosphere in Climate Wars (see 21:00 mark).  Teach the basics as to how it necessarily works. Show that temperature recordings from thousands of years ago are possible with science that attracts interest, like the ice core. We are not tree-huggers, but rather people who are hoping to be able to slow down the record-high temperatures and the drastic storms.

            In addition, use integrity in saying that we must change as a tool.  Make it clear that there is opposition that has skewed what is going on. We have to say more than: “it’s the rich people selling us lies.” In comparison, look at the success of the grassroots campaign of President Obama during his first election. He made clear that it’s through our community-based efforts that we can produce change.  He polarized the Republican party, and in a sense have not allowed them to speak to their true values because they opposed him so staunchly.  The public needs to know that it’s a long road to even slow down what is happening now, but it’s never too late to make efforts to stop the out of control CO2 emissions.

            We have to be honest about how changing the rules on C02 emissions is going to challenge American businesses. It’s going to change the way we live our daily lives. However, there are some things that are going to stay relatively the same. We’ve been honest to our US Government, but A Vast Machine (Edwards, 2010) has clearly shown that they have stood along the side of America as it stands today. They showed us in 1996 that they valued American business over efficiency with the failure to purchase advanced Japanese supercomputers to enhance our Global Circulation Models over American computers (Chapter 7).  The third episode of climate wars showed us that the Bush Administration blatantly hired someone to cover the science behind climate change.  Be honest to the people of this country so that we can move forward.

            Religion has been a loud voice in this country for years. There is no doubt that it has impacted our culture and value systems. We have worked to make sure that it has not intermixed into our politics, but at some instances, it has become inevitable. People have been able to manipulate the science to paint it as another belief system here in our country. I say all of this for two reasons.  First, we can easily market how this is not the case with all of the other science that has led to modernized developments that we see today. We know science isn’t exact. We also know that it doesn’t have to be exact for it to be accurate. It doesn’t have to be exact for there to be policy surrounding what we know about science. The “inversion” of analysis/data in A Vast Machine might be the hardest thing to swallow as climate scientists. We have to show that the inversions are simply showing the same trends from previous methodologies and that they have still left behind consistent truths about our current climate. Secondly, as naïve as these claims sound, they are probably the most important to take down in front of the public eye.  These false claims are the scapegoats that many Americans take because the issue is larger than us.

            This leads me to the final point to mention as we attempt to market the importance of climate change. We must publish a plan. This has to be an interdisciplinary, multi-faceted plan to stop global warming. The public has to see a solution to the issue that we are bringing, instead of just noting that there is a problem. The plan must include a focus in education at younger levels. As we can see, this takes more than scientists to produce change. It takes business people, lawyers, researchers, architects, engineers and teachers. It should include how we go about our day-to-day lives. No, it should not be a new culture that we invent to make people change their lives. It should be a true focus in industry.  The plan could have demonstrations done by our most wealthy influencers, our celebrities. Imagine if kids watched LeBron James bike to Quicken Loans arena because it’s healthy and because he wants to lower C02 emissions. Imagine if you saw a press release that Ray Lewis issued talking about small things on climate change that can have large impact. Imagine if Steven Spielberg put together a film that changed our opinions for decades.  Social media would buzz if celebrities added on a “hashtagged” fact after #Blacklivesmatter is posted.  Our voice must be heard, but it won’t go far if we don’t change the way we market our science.