Thursday 28 February 2008

second pitch

A friend emailed that she didn't understand yesterday's elliptical post about Mike Scott (left) and 'wedge narratives'. Neither did her husband. I emailed back:

'My point was this: when they came to campaigning against litter in Texas they broke the audience into sectors and targeted the specific sector that was most relevant.

Instead of looking for a single message for everyone, they sliced the pie up and went for a single message for a single slice of the pie. It was very effective.

I was linking that idea with one from another area entirely: in 2004 Pakala and Socolow came up with 15 wedges for mitigating climate change. These were 15 different technologies that addressed the issue from 15 different angles. Added together, they would make a very significant impact. The point was, one size doesn't fit all, there isn't a silver bullet, but lots of approaches might do the trick.

I was making a leap, then, and saying that when it comes to discussion about climate change, maybe young white Texan males represent a slice of the pie, and so do golfers, and frequent fliers, hedge fund managers, single mothers with no income, plumbers, interns, birdwatchers, estate agents, traffic wardens and theatre directors; each of these groups will respond to particular stories about climate change (ones that touch their values and sense of identity) and maybe those stories aren't being fully articulated.

So, not one narrative, but many narratives. Not one wedge, but 15 wedges.'

(Yes, the friend emailed back, that was clearer.)

No comments:

Post a Comment