Why the NYT and BBC and MSM in general keep getting it wrong about the power of doom and gloom cli-fi movies and novels. IN FACT, they do galvanize people into action. Ask David Wallace-Wells

HELP!


needed!


 from academics keeping current with the topic of climate risk communications vs the EXPERTS who say that doom and gloom cli-fi movies and doom and gloom cli-fi novels are counter productive and turn readers and viewers OFF and make them feel helpless and blue




, .....and this EXPERT advice is backed up, apparently, by some studies by social scientists and climate scientists with TEENS in the UK and elsewhere that say that doom and gloom novels and movies are BAD for getting people to be more aware of the issues and to even take action. I believe that this is all BULLSHIT, pardon my French, and I am open to any comments otherwise, but I am tired of the NYT and Guardian and BBC and other MSM trotting out the old tired same old same old "alleged study" that proves that doom and gloom novels are the wrong way to go. This study does not exist. There was some study a few years ago that studied TEENAGERS in the UK, not adutls, TEENS, and asking them what they felt about doom and gloom stories, etc.
Well, teens are not the intended audience for adult cli-fi novels and movies. !!! So this study is flawed and BS and all the so-called EXPERTS with PHDs at Yale and Harvard and Princeton are used by the NYT to prove this hypothesis which is wrong and has never been proven.
So....can anyone point me to this so-called expert study that says doom and gloom is not the way to go? Link? There are several so-called studies. they are all BS. I want to find the links in order to tell my contacts in the MSM that they are barking up the wrong tree and that doom and gloom novels and movies are just as good as utopian cli-fi novels. It's all up to the readers and viewers.
In other words, "cultural values, literary values, literary input, not scientific knowledge, actually shape global warming views, more and more,'' as a study by Prof Dan Kahan at Yale from 2012 indicates.
So can you show me that STUDY that proves that doom and gloom turns teens off and makes them blue and depressed rather than pushing them to take action.? I believe deeply that doom and gloom ALSO has the power to push people to take action and to take up and be woke. Utopian novels too. Both.
Recently, the NYT did another cli-fi bashing article quotes severeal so-called experts about who doom and gloom is bad for us. I say NO NO No. doom and gloom is realiity, along with utopian visions, too. Show me the links! THANKS.
NYT reporter Melena Ryzik, just the other day in a cli-fi article writes: ""But getting Hollywood movies about climate change made is not easy. And when they do refer to it — as did the Roland Emmerich 2004 disaster flick “The Day After Tomorrow” — they rarely do much to galvanize the public to action. Even well-intentioned filmmakers with carefully drafted cautionary tales often miss the mark, climate scientists say.''
UH, WHO ARE THESE So-called CLMATE SCIENTISTS and what do THEY know about the arts and literature and novels and movies. VERY LITTLE. The NYT should ask writers and movelists and literary critics to answer this question not govt grand funded PHD guys with their heads in the PHD sands, doing study after study, and never once READING A NOVEL: or seeing a movie. IN FACT, cli-fi movies and novels do wake up people and do galvanize people inmto action, That is how i got into the work! Doom and gloom doesn't scare me. And i love utopian stuff too. But lets stop this MSM nonsense that doom and gloom novels turn people off. They don't. they wake them up.
NYT again here: ''And when climate change is depicted on screen, it’s often in an onslaught of fire and brimstone, an apocalyptic vision that hardly leaves room for a hopeful human response.
That, climate researchers and social scientists say, is exactly the wrong message to give.''
HOW does Melena Ryszik a socity reporter and red carpet gossip reporter know this? She doesn't. But she repeats this stuff over and over again. So I want so links to show her otherwise.
MORE from NYT article: “Typically, if you really want to mobilize people to act, you don’t scare the hell out of them and convince them that the situation is hopeless,” said Andrew Hoffman, a professor at the University of Michigan who is the author of “How Culture Shapes the Climate Change Debate.”
REPoRTER ADDS: But that is just the kind of high-stakes film that Hollywood loves to produce — like “The Day After Tomorrow,” which depicted New York City as a frozen dystopian landscape. Or “Geostorm,” due Oct. 20, in which the climate goes apocalyptically haywire, thanks to satellites that malfunction.
REPORTER ADDS this BS: Copious research shows that this kind of dystopian framing backfires, driving people further into denial and helplessness; instead of acting, they freeze.
Melena did say....''One bright spot in showing environmental alarm onscreen is ....that climate change is a frequent topic of visual artists and writers, where the genre known as cli-fi is growing.''
FINALLY! and Melena concluded her article -- ''So, said Mr. Hoffman, the University of Michigan professor, we need “more movies, more TV, more music.”
“We have to touch people’s hearts on this,” he said. “It’s critical.”






SEE ANTHONY WATTS frist AND ANDREW FREEDMAN second LINKS HERE:


see text and links here -- ''Finally, recognition that doom and gloom, hell and high water, and all that... really aren't effective, and people are getting "climate fatigue" from all that sort of senseless hype.'' says rightwing climate denialist who is not an academic or a scientist but a mere weatherman. -- https://wattsupwiththat.com/.../doomsday-messages-about.../ QUOTE: *****''Dire or emotionally charged warnings about the consequences of global warming can backfire if presented too negatively, making people less amenable to reducing their carbon footprint, according to new research from the University of California, Berkeley.

“Our study indicates that the potentially devastating consequences of global warming threaten people’s fundamental tendency to see the world as safe, stable and fair. As a result, people may respond by discounting evidence for global warming,” said Robb Willer, UC Berkeley social psychologist and coauthor of a study to be published in the January issue of the journal Psychological Science.

“The scarier the message, the more people who are committed to viewing the world as fundamentally stable and fair are motivated to deny it,” agreed Matthew Feinberg, a doctoral student in psychology and coauthor of the study.

But if scientists and advocates can communicate their findings in less apocalyptic ways, and present solutions to global warming, Willer said, most people can get past their skepticism.''


https://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/11/19/doomsday-messages-about-global-warming-can-backfire-new-study-shows/


Dire or emotionally charged warnings about the consequences of global warming can backfire if presented too negatively, making people less amenable to reducing their carbon footprint, according to new research from the University of California, Berkeley.


“Our study indicates that the potentially devastating consequences of global warming threaten people’s fundamental tendency to see the world as safe, stable and fair. As a result, people may respond by discounting evidence for global warming,” said Robb Willer, UC Berkeley social psychologist and coauthor of a study to be published in the January issue of the journal Psychological Science.


email the expert at
willer@standford.edu





“The scarier the message, the more people who are committed to viewing the world as fundamentally stable and fair are motivated to deny it,” agreed Matthew Feinberg, a doctoral student in psychology and coauthor of the study.


But if scientists and advocates can communicate their findings in less apocalyptic ways, and present solutions to global warming, Willer said, most people can get past their skepticism.




ANDREW FREEDMAN LINK:


Do not accept New York Mag's climate change doomsday scenario ("Studies have shown...BS)


http://mashable.com/2017/07/10/new-york-mag-climate-story-inaccurate-doomsday-scenario/#zRZEF2mztPqz


see his refrain, which the NYT copied and parrotted: STUDIES HAVE DOWN, which studies, Andrew, which studies? He doesn't link them or ID, just as NYT didnt name or ID them.


''All of this is scary. However, climate scientists nearly universally say that there is still time to avert the worst consequences of global warming, and that this message needs to be driven home again and again in order to encourage leaders to act. Doom and gloom only leads to fear and paralysis, studies have shown.''