This belongs in a Neil Postman book somewhere.

This has been itching at the back of my mind all week:

People who come from the humanities and science, they have a view that if you present the facts quietly to people in power, they will make rational judgements and people will change. And it’s not true. The people on the other side, who go to business school, they understand how the brain really works and how public opinion really works. So they’re talking about values and moral narratives and imagery. They’re good at it. So it’s an out of balance situation. (from here)

Translation: you silly humanities people; you think you can reason with people and change the world. Well, we know better. We know you have to manipulate your way to the top. 

This is the perfect example of a well-intentioned marketer (yeah, OK, "communications." Fine.) who doesn't understand that the medium is part of the problem. Advertising culture is not only dangerous because of the message; it's dangerous because of the ways it trains us to think: superficially, irrationally, and almost sub-linguistically. It's a medium where clever catchphrases substitute for rational thought, where ease and convenience trump all.

It's a medium that creates people in its own image. When we engage in that culture, we are learning to think on advertising's terms. Advertising does not create people who can do things like make sacrifices for the good of future generations. Advertising creates people who live only in the present and think only about their immediate desires. They will respond to campaigns about any kind of social justice issue only if it's easy and trendy.

Advertising will only be able to promote action on global climate change (or anything else) insofar as that action is easy, rewarding, and communicable in one-syllable words. But very specific individual campaigns notwithstanding, any effective and systemic action on climate change is going to be difficult and inconvenient. It will require protracted effort and serious thought. We will have to do things that are not fun, easy, or fashionable, and we'll have to do them consistently and thoughtfully.

If we're going to make systemic changes - the changes that really count - we need a society capable of thought far above the level of advertising. And we can't achieve that society by manipulating people through ad campaigns for the sake of different causes. Personally, I'm skeptical as to whether we can achieve it at all, but if it's even possible, it will be through changing the medium, not just the message.

That's why I insist on doing something so unspeakably naive as engaging in rational conversation. It's not because I think that's the dominant register of discourse - of course it isn't! It's because we learn to think and argue that way by doing it. Social justice advocates can sink to the level of Burger King and political smear campaigns, or we can help people develop their capacities for empathy, long-term thinking, reason, and critical analysis. The former is absurd: you cannot manipulate people into rational behavior. The latter may be impossible, but at least it isn't inherently ridiculous.

This is why I don't trust advertising people even when they claim to be on my side. As long as they're pulling marketing tricks on anyone - no matter what the message is - they're not truly working in the service of social justice.