Queensland Climate Movement

This workshop considered communication around the continued existence of greenhouse skepticism, and what it means for the messaging of the climate movement.

Concerns were raised about the strength of greenhouse skepticism in the community - it was noted that while many no longer see this as an issue, others felt that we need to strengthen our responses to greenhouse skepticism significantly before we will gain sufficient policy traction.

Participants felt that governments and industry perpetuate the myth of finding Aladdin’s lamp - but, as one person noted, the genie misbehaves. Huge amounts of money are invested in media, PR and research. Very strong vested interests undertake massive amounts of communication efforts to dismiss climate change impacts. Some examples include:

• Astroturf groups: these are groups that are apparently grassroots-based or coalitions, but in actuality are that conceived, created and/or funded by corporations, industry trade associations, and political interests.
  • Examples in Australia include the Australian Environment Foundation and the Lavoisier Group.
• Greenwash campaigns: this is the unjustified appropriation of environmental virtue by a company, an industry, a government, a politician or even a non-government organization to create a pro-environmental image, sell a product or a policy, or to try and rehabilitate their standing with the public and decision makers. A combination of whitewash and brainwashing.
  • Examples in Australia include NewGenCoal, a PR campaign funded by the Australian Coal Association.
• SLAPPS: This stands for Strategic Law Suits Against Public Participation, and consist of court cases against campaigners by corporations or project proponents in an attempt to distract or dissuade them from their campaign.
  • Examples in Australia include, most famously, the Gunns 20 case.

Participants noted that people are more inclined to believe skeptics, as the message of climate change activism is less palatable and would require significant action and lifestyle changes.

They also noted that some of the skeptics are clever, with established reputations and have significant influence on decision-makers and opinion-shapers.

A few things that they say are patently false, but often you have to do research to locate this. Most people are not sufficiently critical of what we take on board - and hence can often reinforce the general message.

The sorts of evidence that skeptics quote:

• Emphasise the costs of action on climate change
• Global modelling needs to be re-assessed in light of financial crisis
• Not do anything until others do it
• Slump in public support for climate change actions