“Quick Honey, Turn the Lights On!â€Â
The following is a guest post from Dan Bryan. Dan’s a good friend from seminary and budding blogger. Check out Dan’s Twitter at Twitter.com/_danbryan and give him a follow. Enjoy the post, and let Dan know what you think in the comments!
My wife and I participated in something called ‘Earth Hour’s this past Saturday night – read more here www.earthhour.org. There were a variety of participants ranging from regular people like me to the famous Big Ben clock tower in the U.K. In my city Chicago, last year’s participation resulted in a reduction of electricity use of 7% over that hour – the equivalent of taking about 1 million cars off the road or planting 158 acres of trees. All good things right?
This was hardly an act of heroism – in fact we thoroughly enjoyed ourselves (NCAA tourney games ending in time helped my activism as well!). This picture pretty much sums up our experience:
Armed with some candles and a couple glasses of wine, we did our part, staring out our 9th floor window to see which neighbors were participating, chatting till 9:30 until we could make something in the oven (it’s electric and after an hour we got pretty hungry – we like to eat).
So, why should you care? Well, I found some of the chatter leading up to earth hour incredibly fascinating. No huge buzz, but around Chicago there were billboards, short news stories, and of course I watched my Twitter/Facebook accounts. Some of the commentary leading up to 8:30 PM CST really struck me; I heard several statements like this one (I’m paraphrasing):
“I’ve almost got every light on, a few more to go and I’ll be ready for earth hour. Maybe I’ll even buy more!â€Â
I could go on, but I won’t. You get the idea. Whatever the reason, some people didn’t agree with the premise of earth hour – reasonable. But, why would you choose to respond in that way? I’m not a card-carrying member of WWF (the organization behind earth hour and NOT the “world wrestling federatonâ€Â) – but I agree that we are a culture of users – I am a wasteful user. Conservation isn’t a big value for us; we use more than we need all the time and responses like the ones above only validate that point.
I’m not interested in debating the premise of earth hour; what I’m interested in is this deep seeded urge in all of us to be contrary. In fact I want to give these folks the benefit of the doubt – they probably have great reasons for dissenting; but because of the way they went about it I doubt anyone is listening. How am I responding when I disagree with something? I might have the best reasons, carefully crafted, scientifically ‘proven’ even – but does that give me license for responding in a way that only escalates conflict and division – or in this case adds to the problem? I propose that it doesn’t.
My question to myself and to you – what are the ‘earth hours’ you’ve responded to lately? How did you do? Is my posture one of conversation and relationship with the world around me? Or have I taken a stand only to be sending a message I never intended?
dan, thanks for you post. i wonder if the majority of people who talk like that back up their rhetoric with action. having said that, it's worth considering how platforms like facebook and twitter may negatively impact substantive dialogue.
first, these platforms constantly solicit us to express our opinions… quizzes, 20 things memes, whatever. in some way, they suggest that we should have an opinion about everything and that merely having an opinion about something makes it valid. second, the kind of expression fostered on FB and twitter is that of display and presentation. i paint myself like a fill in the numbers portrait. the point is to profile myself to you in the clearest, most abbreviated terms possible, not to call myself into question or engage you in dialogue. given these provisos, it seems that platforms like FB and twitter are likely to lead to an elevation in rhetoric of the kind you describe.
interesting thoughts bryne – thanks for taking the time to read and respond. whether the rhetoric is acted upon seems secondary to me – why even say it?
i can see where you are heading with the point about social media. that really wasn't on my mind as i wrote though because i saw interviews on the news expressing the same thing. i think you're right on when you say that we are encouraged to have an opinion with tools like FB and twitter and that "merely having an opinion about something makes it valid" – this is right on.
one way to think about it is that these platforms and our new desire to communicate as we do will lead to a plethora of unwanted and ill-based opinions on everything….
however, i think another way to look at it is that we should attempt to have opinions and think through more things – and that these platforms are calling us to do so is a great thing for society. if we all do it carelessly and devoid of any intellectual effort it will be meaningless drivel – but as is my experience there is so much to be learned, and a lot of brilliant people that can tell me more in 140 characters than i could in a book.
so – to wrap it up, i think that the personal responsibility to consider HOW we are responding and engaging in dialogue (like earth hour) is no different in the realm of social media than it is in every day life. i think that we're seeing this stretched because more and more of society is being set free to engage ideas that they were either too lazy or unaware of before we had these platforms. i see tools like FB and twitter only enhancing this dialogue (and for some making it possible for the first time).
you make an excellent call though for 'think before you tweet.'
we are looking to be simpler and more efficient