Hearing Echoes of an Unsung Song

This message was sent by me to Andy Mahler, founder of the environmental organization "Heartwood."

This relatively new form of mass media, The Blog, is the answer to questions posed below.

Hearing Echoes of an Unsung Song

In view of every communications media known to man one must consider the incredible inequity that exists, in terms of the amount of air time, print space and cyberspace, between messages dedicated to promote unbridled capitalistic consumerism and those designed to teach and promote conservation and environmental stewardship.

We, as environmentalist, have the most fundamentally sound message on earth. Our problem is not so much how to articulate our message. When I visit environmental group message boards and forums I am astounded at the high quality of intellect and great command of language demonstrated by grass roots level individuals who, by in large, are not professional writers or environmental advocates. This quality may, in fact, exist because these individuals own a passion that drives an uncommon thoughtfulness that in turn produces clear thinking and expression. Yet I remain frustrated that the majority of these great messages bounce off invisible media barriers and end up being heard only by those who already espouse the messenger’s ideology. We suffer perpetually from the proverbial “preaching to the choir” syndrome.

These messages are not wasted in the sense that they serve to encourage us. However, we need more than intramural encouragement. We must gain equal access to the same amplifiers enjoyed by the so-called mainstream voices. If using the same amplifiers as our adversaries proves to be impractical or, in any number of ways, detrimental to our cause we must invent our own amplifiers.

I am not prepared to offer a single suggestion as to how we may accomplish this without sacrificing our integrity. We will not be bought, nor will we trade one iota of our natural world for a day in the spotlight. We must never fall into a political game that, by definition, requires sacrifice of our ideology and, in our case, physical air, water, and land. Air, water, and land are not ours to give or compromise away. They are ours to protect.

My fundamental question is, have we rightfully been so busy perfecting our rationale, ideology and delivery that we have failed to consider how best to broadcast our message?

We have a wealth of wonderful approaches and mediums by which to project our messages. What we don’t have are the amplifiers necessary to make these wonderful messages heard. By amplifiers I mean mass communications mechanisms that we can operate free of capitalistic and corporate obligations, constraints and interference. Because radio and television are still, collectively, mediums that reach the greatest number of people we must somehow tap into these realms of influence, in my view, realms we are failing to exercise to our greatest advantage. How do we do this?

Of literally hundreds of media outlets how many have we secured for our exclusive use. We now have entire networks dedicated to cooking. We have some mild forms of environmental information dissemination on cable/satellite channels. Discovery, Animal Planet, PBS and the like offer many good messages, messages only to be interrupted by well-crafted abrogating corporate (in your face) messages promoting consumerism. Kids and adults alike often enjoy the nature programming but lose the conservation message to both cryptic and ballistic marketing of consumerism. This is the substance of the frustration I feel.

I am suggesting we keep writing, educating, advocating and acting to further our cause. Grass roots movements are powerful movements. Let’s never let up. In fact, let’s do more.

I am pleading we begin to consider seriously how we might begin to level the playing field with corporate America without compromising our ideology. Can it be done? Has it been tried? Has it been tried with great vigor and persistence? Have all possibilities been exhausted in failure? I optimistically prefer to believe not.

The most beautiful song confined to the recording studio is a great tragedy; likewise our message.

We do all the right stuff when we try to engage local medias in our cause. At best, however, our success is hit or miss, hot and cold, or off and on. No degree of sustained success can be expected as owners and editors come and go. How do we seize some measure of control of the amplifiers we desperately need to make our perfectly logical and scientifically sound messages heard?

At this point I merely wish to open up dialogue about the possibilities.

We have the greatest message on earth, for earth, and we have the messengers to articulate that message.

The difficult question is, “How do we amplify our voice to gain the attention of a public that, provided our irrefutable message is presented in the same dose, decibel level and frequency as that of the capitalistic message, will (in appreciable numbers) intuitively understand and appreciate what we have to say.

Poetry, a seemingly dying form of expression, still serves to move the unmovable. Our message, I believe is a message of love. We plead for the unborn yet to walk upon the face of this great blue and green sphere, one that spins ever so delicately to the rhythm of the universe. Everyone knows we environmentalists have, personally, little to nothing to gain from our efforts. That we would go to jail to preserve this planet for those yet to be born and for so-called “lesser” creatures cannot be fathomed by the heartless takers of this world’s treasures. These, we will never touch. To these we will always be radical kooks. So be it. Yet I believe the whole of mankind possesses a spark of decency that if presented our message, in a manner that is audible above the “noise,” will be moved and ignited to the passion we already know. We have nothing to sell but a fortune to give away.

A bell’s not a bell ‘till you ring it
A song’s not a song ‘til you sing it
Love in your heart wasn’t put there to stay
Love isn’t love ‘til you give it away!

~ Oscar Hammerstein

I don’t pretend to have answers nor to know where to start. I do know one thing, it is time to start. Mother Teresa when asked how she, with so little resources and support, had helped comfort so very many lives replied quietly and humbly, “ I start where I am.”

Friends, I sent the message (below) to the "Community Manager" of C-SPAN's on-line forum.
===============

Message To C-SPAN’s On-Line “Community Manager”

Please consider adding "Environment" as a category choice in your Browse Issues drop down window.

Whether local or global in scope, the health of the natural environment is an issue common to all inhabitants of the planet, whether or not everyone appreciates this fact.

When there no longer remains fresh air to breathe, clean water to drink and healthy food to eat, nothing else matters. Politics, economy, and all else is of little consequence when gasping for air, thirsting for water, and/or dying of malnutrition.

Environmentalists are often considered "fringe" elements of society. They are not. Realized or not everyone is an environmentalist. Realized or not, anyone who depends on air to breathe, water to drink, and food to nourish their body is an environmentalist. In other words there are two basic types of environmentalists, those who know they are environmentalists and those who don’t.

Astute environmentalists are seldom afforded a medium through which their voices can be amplified. Given the same megaphone as corporate America, the message of environmental stewardship would inherently recapture open and honest hearts of citizens in the U.S. Only when the astute environmental community is given a reasonable means to amplify its voice will rogue capitalists (and environmentally irresponsible individuals) be enlightened and hopefully, of their own conscience, be forced to behave responsibly toward the environment.

As long as the voice of environmental facts and issues is baffled the environmentally astute citizens and their pleas will remain to be considered fringe elements of society.

In the end the environment is the final, and only, issue common to all mankind. Should a speeding train brake now or later when the bridge ahead is known to be collapsing? When and if ecological collapse will occur are uncertain. How much pollution can we create and how many plant and animal species can we lose before the domino effect begins? Not knowing the precise answer is not a license (or excuse) to continue destroying the tiny remnant of this planet’s natural habitat. To do so is no less than ecological roulette. What is certain is the finite nature of planet earth.

Finite resources, cumulative pollution, and a growing population compute a definite point at which ecological collapse is logically and mathematically imminent. Continuing to produce, even relatively decreasing levels of air, water, and land pollution continues to create an increasing sum of pollutants permeating our air, water and land.

To deny these facts is to deny reality.

However, the factors can be intelligently managed as to avoid the nebulous point of ecological collapse. As with any worthwhile goal, much effort and, more importantly, restraint will be required of humanity.

C-SPAN, your organization is a point of light in a very foggy time of history. Please give the environment a chance, a voice.

Thank You.

==============