Building a mass movement entails reaching the widest possible layer of people, using every available medium and distribution channel at our disposal. We want to fully utilise the skills/interests/resources of the people around us. We can enthuse more people to get involved, collaborate and take “ownership†and thereby solve many of the problems due to our limited numbers and resources discussed here and in other fora. I think the Global Images gallery proves - in a small way - that this kind collaboration can work. We need to extend and deepend this collaboration to other areas.
One of the things we could do is produce a campaign video. I'm told some people are working on a climate documentary. The forum could have an important role to play in facilitating such cooperation.
Where next?
I agree that building a mass movement requires us to reach the maximum number of people with a wide range of messages through a wide range of media.
It's interesting to consider the planning meeting was attended by 100 people, with perhaps another 100 who didn't come but were aware and involved. So each person found 50 people each, on average. If half the marchers achieved that same level you get 250,000.
The idea of an invite that can be sent to people (suggested by another poster) could be interesting - but only if it starts to set a date in people's minds. I know the demo is just over and it could seem premature to talk about organising the next one - but I think that is a key element in making this work.
A video, of course, is a great opportunity - something that builds an emotional response, an atmosphere. I suspect we're now in the realm of emotions not logic - we have many logical arguments but people react to emotions first - we need more emotive imagery and stronger tugs on people's conscience.
Conferences and meetings are a vital part - people must feel they belong to something. But we have to use every trick, gigs, network building, public meetings, local demonstrations. A movement needs people to feel part of the whole while acting autonomously, but with links to a core to provide money, legal protection, speakers, access to skills etc.
I know this all comes back to fund raising. The problem is that on the whole you find there are people who have money or who are good at raising it and there are people who are good at action and organisation. Not many of those involved, I suspect, are strong on money and fundraising.
Phil talked of his demo of 1 a few years ago, someone told me there were 400 last year.
I suspect that could be the message, something like:
2001 1 person stood alone
2002 50 people met
2003 200 gathered
2004 400 marched
2005 10,000 demonstrated
2006 How many? YOU DECIDE.
People could then see something building, could feel they were going to be part of something big and that would make them feel that they were doing more.
Although it could backfire we could try getting people to pledge to attend the next march. If we have a number that continues to rise then it could also build momentum. Have the number showing on the CACC website.
I agree that to make outreach, network growth and voice grow we have to continue with the message, continue the momentum. A lot of people put a huge amount of effort in to get this turn out, if the momentum is used then less effort could produce larger results, next year. But if we delay too long then the visibility will drop and the effort to get people moving again will be more difficult.
Someone said there was to be a big march in Washington in the summer, perhaps we should aim to march again at the same time?
There can be no subsititute for setting a date and continuing to hold meetings around the country, getting news into the papers and generally keeping a buzz going. The build up of stories talking about the march in the final week was great but of course if we'd been able to get some items starting 6 months ago and then accelerating to a peak more people would have remembered it was going to happen. Many people said they only heard about it at the last minute. Of course a lot of people do work on the last minute we found that with the buses, with large numbers of seats still available with a week to go and then pretty much fully booked the night before. Unfortunately if we want much larger turn out's we have to break out of the more sympathetic press and reach the other's - but then perhaps that's possible with mor epolitical parties seeming to support binding targets.
I also think that focus must be maintained on a short list of "demands" but we also have to be able to extend it. Of course the risk is that as a movement grows the message is diluted to appeal to more people - that mustn't happen and it mustn't be hijacked by figureheads as well.
I think there is common ground between the demonstrators and we need to find it and hammer that message. It seems there is general agreement that binding targets are required, that they should be sufficient to meet the reductions required and that they should provide for a move to global per capita equality of emissions.
Sorry if this rambles a bit and if it is just old hat. But I think that the next two weeks and then January are going to be crucial to any positive follow-up to the march. We need to hold the march and messages in people's minds before christmas diverts them, and then we need to put it back at the front of their minds after the holiday period.
reaching more people
Why did Make Poverty History attracht quarter of a million and the Climate Change March just over 10,000? There are many reasons for this, but one of them, no doubt, is that the big development NGOs can mobilise vast numbers of people and are NOT mobilising them against climate change.
I have spoken to people from various development NGOs that are part of Stop Climate Chaos and have been told many times that they think FoE should take the lead on this, that this is such a new topic (six!) they don't have anything to say on it, that they don't know much about this, and that they have too many important other campaigns. There appears to be serious ignorance and denial about climate change going through most development NGOs.
Yes, there are a tiny number of their members that have done good work (in Scotland I have come across exactly one such person - who works with Christian Aid, despite there being offices of several organisations). Yet this is not being communicated to their members. Tearfund, for example, have issued one of the best and most moving reports about climate change I have ever read (Dried Up, Drowned Out). So what does their supporters' newsletter say about droughts in Africa and floods in Central America? It says those were natural disaster, please give aid and pray that they will quickly recover from those events. Not a word about climate change. Similar with Christian Aid. And Oxfam. And the WDM say they'll support those who campaign on climate change but focus on their own clean water for all campaign instead. Now how you can campaign for clean water for all without speaking about climate change is beyond me, much as I oppose water privatisation (after all, once the Andean glaciers are gone the questions whether the dwindling vanishing waters are in the hands of private or state-owned companies will become a bit of a side issue).
Imagine the impact of an Oxfam Christmas Mailing even mentioning climate change!
I believe that, to really change attitudes and mobilise people, we need to get the likes of Oxfam, Christian Aid, Tearfund, WDM and Action Aid on board - they need to realise that this is the greatest threat to the people they work with and that it is their duty to do what they can to stabilise the climate! And they have shown that they can mobilise hundreds of millions if they choose to. Which the environmental movement simply cannot.
I'm sure others have more ideas than I have about how to go about involving those NGOs (in terms of raising awareness, getting a commitment to campaign).
Almuth Ernsting
Environmental NGO tactics
Green NGOs have always tended to go for 'symbolic' protests instead of mass mobilisations. This started with Greenpeace's perfection of the tactic, with the ketch 'Vega' sailing into one of the French nuclear testing zones in Polynesia. It was an absolutely brilliant tactic, with dramatic flair, and perfectly highlighting the illegal manner in which the tests were taking place. Greenpeace have continued in this vein ever since. In the two weeks before our protest, they made headlines in the papers - on the subject of climate change - with two symbolic protests: first by dumping a tonne of coal outside Downing Street, secondly by disrupting Blair's conference on nuclear energy.
What does this tell us? It tells us that there is already a group carrying out symbolic, highly-noticed protests for our cause - so in one respect that approach is already covered. But it also tells us we could, and should, be more media-savvy. I believe that getting thousands of people onto the streets SHOULD create headlines. After Dec 3rd, there were some, but they were pretty paltry. We can do better. Now, I am not necessarily advocating a move towards the NVDA (Non-Violent Direct Action) tactics of Greenpeace; mass mobilisation is obviously still the name of the game. However, to publicise such gatherings before they happen, we ought to work out some ways of putting on symbolic protests, that highlight problems and hypocrisies that lie at the crux of our issue.
One could get very cynical about the media, deplore the degree to which it craves spectacle and will be very fickle in moving onto new agendas once the last one is exhausted. Fine. I probably agree. But mass media is a channel which we can ignore, and languish in obscurity, or one we can try to manipulate. Don't get me wrong - I think we're getting there (several adverts and at least 4 columnists mentioning us in the run-up to D3 was impressive). But the media's focus on spectacle and conflict is not simply a modern fad; it also speaks to something within all of us. Martin Luther King sought - actively sought - to create "tension" in the marches he attended, so as to highlight the latent injustices that lay within the segregation system. Our issue is somewhat different, but there is still a need to frame 'tension'.
One such way might be to focus in on certain local matters. When the bypass was built around my home town of Newbury, the protests dominated Newbury for months, and threw up a storm of controversy in the national consciousness too. I notice CCC is allied to Road Alert, to Stop Esso, to various campaigns whose targets are more specific than ours. Transport could be one issue; airport expansion another; grants for home generation, another. I welcome the broad-church, big-issue approach we have at present, but I feel we can really show people how climate change relates to the way we all live, in a more focussed way, by occasionally taking the time to frame defined dilemmas.
What is the Strategy for the Campaign - IDEAS PLEASE
Agree with ideas on building a mass movement. Suggest we discuss here lots of other ideas for the Campaign, in run-up and after the meeting to discuss strategy this Wednesday in the London offices. Here are my suggestions to kick things off from the pre-march meetings in Bristol and Scarborough and from Saturday and the sleepy days that followed:
Bristol - a teacher (hope you are reading this) suggested a website idea to really engage teachers and the next generation - to spread the word and actions on climate change. How, ideas? Lets make this happen!
Scarborough - the meeting was great because the panel included two sixth form students, who said stuff like "this is scary" and "we have to be optimistic to make sure we achieve what we need to do". Should all our future meetings include and involve young people in this way?
The March and the media - is was hard work to get in the media before hand and many people who would have come did not get the message. More media work by around the country and through partner organisations (with Stop Climate Chaos formal backing) would have helped before the march. Coverage of the march was not picked up in the Guardian and Tory broadsheets or tabloids after the march? Why?
- Which celebrities can we approach to support future events (to get tabloid interest)?
- How can we make it more newsworthy - our picture opportunity at Downing Street was not used by the media?
- Ideas for future events - are marches old-hat, concerts too hard to organise? What is the best thing for us to do next?
Do we need to do some low-carbon publicity stunts spread over the next year - any ideas?
Could we do town-level events across the UK (should we work with Stop Climate Chaos) and then encourage all to join/representatives on a march coinciding with the middle Saturday of the next climate talks in Nov 2006 - to make this an annual international protest?
Finally, building on this discussion - how can we build our network of activists in as many towns, schools, churchs, companies and NGOs as possible round the country and recognise them (e.g. Newcastle C&C rep) to help them get on regional tv, radio and press?
We should hold a "Montreal Briefing" asap
There is a lot I could write on this subject so I'll just stick to a few things we could - indeed should - be doing very soon.
Hold a "Montreal Briefing" asap to discuss what happened at the talks. I think the Bush administration lost at Montreal. They found themselves isolated at the talks, the British delegation did not cave-in to the US as many of us expected - as Jonathan explained in his email. We should do this with our FoE friends as many of them have been following the talks more closely than us. However this is just one battle in a long war and the Kyoto targets are nowhere near sufficient if we are to prevent the risk of run-away global warming. It's important that we get our message out in this period. This needs to be done in meetings all over the country and our networks need to be centrally involved in this.
In the coming months it will also be important for us to expose the gap between the government's rhetoric on combatting global warming and its policies. Just this week the government announced that it was reducing the energy efficiency requirements for new build housing and BAA anounced plans to build another runway at Stanstead. How we go about this will entail more discussion. But we could consider organising film festivals on a climatic theme or other such cultural events together with local meetings.
Where next?
There are a lot of good ideas here and I agree that a meeting to discuss Montreal and future tactics is necessary. We don't want people to see the news about Montreal and think, "Oh, that's Ok then, Climate Change is sorted now...". We want them to think. "5% of cuts is pathetic, we need 95% !". Media interest needs to be courted but such a small proportion of the population even read the 'Independent' (250,000) and 'Guardian' (450,000)- that really it's the TV media and also the local press that we need to target. Alot of people in small and large towns will read their local paper but not a broadsheet national paper. For the TV media we need the larger NGO's specialist Press Officers with personal contacts and influence. For the local press we need our activists around the country to court their local papers and get their supporters to bombard them with letters for the letters pages, plus if funds allow it, to take out ads. It is hard to attract media attention for this subject as they do like a story arc and there is no story arc to Climate Change - just some very unpalatable facts about our future on the planet that people don't want to hear. What is 'Stop Climate Chaos' doing by the way? They are almost invisible at the moment?!
Also the idea of celebrities is crucial - apart from the obvious ones such as Rob Newman (who is already touring a show about Peak Oil and Climate Change) surely there are other bigger names that we could approach? I was wondering about Mark Thomas, but I know he is working on the Arms Trade at the moment.
As for the future - I thought there was another Climate Conference next summer in Lille, France? I like the idea of having lots of small demonstrations in towns and cities around the UK - I think that would probably have more of an impact on the media and if it was held to coincide with the talks in Lille and it happened to be a sunny day we would get a lot more people on the streets. We could organise this for the summer and then organise another big national one for November again and then see which March got the most coverage.
I am happy to come up to London in the near future to be part of a national discussion on future tactics.
Cathy Green, Cheltenham.
Working with NGOs, messaging and Lille
The following are my thoughts on the way to go following D3.
1. We need to work with Stop Climate Chaos / green NGOs in developing the protest design/messaging. That could have achieved us support from Stop Climate Chaos as a whole. In the end we had publicity to FoE and People and Planet networks but no funding. Greenpeace initially supported us but withdrew, presumably because our call to action wasn’t quite compatible with their messaging. This wouldn’t have happened if the messaging had been teamworked with the NGOs.
2. Our own process for developing protest design and messages should involve continuous teamwork from when a demo is first conceived, without these issues giving way to other matters at meetings.
3. The way to do this is for CCC to have a policy committee = council or board of directors (depending on constitutional framework) who would deal with matters of policy and messaging.
4. Key opportunities now for CCC and its supporter network are: (i) larger joint demos with Stop Climate Chaos (ii) volunteers keen to engage in educating the public (iii) provide a forum and mutual support for a variety of positive actions.
5. I suggest CCC develops educational resource that oversees educational content of talks, leaflets and publicity. This could do webpages for teachers and others.
6. As regards Lille conference, how about a series of simultaneous protests outside Town Halls throughout Europe? That would:
(i) avoid mass travel to Lille;
(ii) allow more people to attend;
(iii) attract local newspaper publicity both in advance, and after, thus getting to good target audiences and helping build up attendance, and recruitment in the process;
(iv) could highlight local authority’s performance under Home Energy Conservation Act 1995 (UK) / highlight a suitable municipal-level issue in other countries;
(v) could highlight host nation’s performance vis-à -vis Kyoto targets and EU emissions trading process.
media & outreach
dear all,
many of these suggestions are excellent, however the essence of their feasibility is organisational: funding and the possibility of the controlled delegation of authority within the campaign. tedious stuff, but we've got to face it.
something to try next time
The Oxford planning meeting was great and well worth repeating. But should we have one national meeting or several regional meetings? Using Alex's (Berkshire) numbers and we wanted to (eventually) get 100,000 on the street, 2000 people would need to be involved in the organisation, that's a big room. That's also a big jump from the 100 at Oxford.
Outreach. I think the regional outreach worked because we met other people from the same area, and in my case, North London, we did a lot of tube leafletting which not otherwise have happened. But did the sector outreach really work? I wasn't really sure where we got to, even with the green groups. Next time, I think we need to have small groups of people that outreach into very specific NGOs eg Oxfam. The other sector groups that met at Oxford; scientists, teachers and unions might have been very busy networking but they were doing it very quietly. James and Jonathon, you both advocate working with teachers, perhaps you could try contacting some of the teachers that went to Oxford, we have their emails.
Almuth's comments about the dev NGOs are interesting. It's OK to ask FOE to lead but are the dev NGOs going to follow. Haven't we got to persuade the staff (esp newsletter and magazine editors) of these orgs that they do want to promote the issue. Do some of us need to go and give lunch time talks to staff? Just because an NGO is a SCC partner does not mean that they are really committed.
Predemo stunt. Guy mentioned this above. We did discuss this in London in the week before Dec 3 but we were running around like headless chickens. It would be good if some group inside or outside London with EF! , Greenpeace or another NVDA org organised this stunt. A banner drop would be good.
Promotion. We printed over 100,000 leaflets but the blue leaflet was designed at the last minute and in about 8 hours. I think we need to ask different people to propose leaflet designs, we could do this now before we have the next date set. We have got a creative team, formed in Oxford, so let's get them involved very early. Wouldn't this make a great design project? Then we can have people vote for the preferred design using an electronic poll on the forum. The date, and location can always be changed prior to printing.
Jim and Alex and others mentioned getting the message right and not allowing any dilution. That's hard especially if it's an international demo. The only way to get a lot of people involved, is unfortunately to have a weak message or a message that is not contentious.
Cathy mentioned getting coverage in local papers. Someone drafted a sample letter a week before the event but it was too late. Gerry in Bangor did write a post here suggesting this but, at the time, the forum had only a few readers. I admit I missed the chance with my local papers.
On the day. The assembly time was 12 but the march was scheduled to move off at 1pm. We could easily have moved off at 12.30PM. That would mean that the speakers could have started 30 minutes earlier as well. I think it is unreasonable to ask people that come by coach to arrive any earlier that 30 minutes before the move off time. The other problem was the 2000 placards that we made the previous weekend. At least 600 or 700 never left LIF, we had too many. We need to have fewer placards but make sure that they are at the front of the demo. The stage was great but the PA was not very effective (i think because speakers were too low and close to stage). Shane /Brixton Tea party sold great soup. The campaign stall wasn't properly organised; James and Mary M stepped in at the last minute. Also think all those that are 'working' should wear the silver wigs (used by the campaign reps - great idea) or yellow jackets.
Guy argues that we need to create tension on the march. Can we do this and still keep it fluffy or are these two things just complete opposite? Some people said that the march was just great fun, can we make it even more so and increase tension.
Breaking out of London. Most of the early outreach and demo organisation for D3 was done from London. It would be great if one or more group of activists based out of London took over coordination of a complete task, like say green outreach or union outreach or teacher outreach away from London.
Next event. Cathy, Guy and Jim seem to be leaning towards town level events during Lille and a national demo (does that have to be in London?) in November. Sounds good to me. Alex mentioned a demo coinciding with a Washington demo.
Co-opting NGOs
Any well-run NGO would not leave it to a newsletter editor to decide whether to mention our march as a supporter action. It would be part of a management decision as to which actions (of any kind) are being promoted within their calendar.
Friends of the Earth clearly did take such a management decision, mentioning the march in their newsletter, on their website and to their email group.
That is why we need to actively negotiate with NGOs (campaigns/management) for their support, including what message(s) would be acceptable to them and what further action(s) the demo is linked to.
For the occasion of our D3 protest, our further action(s) were that:
(i) CCC handed in a letter to Downing St, invited all its members to email their MPs, and has written officially to all MPs, all asking that the Prime Minister reaffirm his commitment to legally binding targets.
(ii) Speeches, and also public meetings, added to awareness of issues;
(iii) CCC's promotions at Make Poverty History included a leaflet setting out how climate change risks "increasing poverty forever";
(iv) Our official letter to MPs highlighted and included several poignant news items on subject of climate change.
Why we need strong, positive messaging
I agree John that messaging should not be too contentious, but it should not be weak. If you have weak messaging, you do not educate people about how things should be done differently, and the media will construe the messages themselves, or pick up on others’ strong messages.
In UK broadsheets’ coverage of D3, the Independent on Sunday described marchers as “carrying banners linking the President and the Prime Minister as “climate criminalsâ€, whereas the Sunday Telegraph reported “many of those taking part…chanted anti-political slogans...some carried banners saying 'Bush, Blair, Beckett: climate criminals', while others waved banners which read 'Save Our World'." (see http://forum.campaigncc.org/?q=node/498)
This was unfortunate for CCC's letter to all MPs in which I reported on D3. I wanted to refer them to a substantial press cutting mentioning CCC by name. However I felt forced to choose the IoS because their coverage of messages (see above) was less adverse to our intentions, although they didn’t mention CCC whereas the Sunday Telegraph did.
The more we use and display strong and edgy messages, the more the media will report them, as occurred with “Make Poverty History†or “Not In My Nameâ€.
Desirée Maghoo, an experienced PR professional, recommended to the media subgroup that CCC should look to use positive or affirmative message(s), as they attract wider participation and media support.
Consider again Greenpeace and the Sierra Club. Greenpeace stated “Ignore the US administration. Take actionâ€, echoed by the Sierra Club (see same node reference). That is a clear, incisive, positive message that is not contentious among environmental groups, and actually draws in opponents of the original Kyoto agreement.
Creativity... and tension
This is mainly in reply to John Ackers' post above (sorry to not catch you in the pub last night John, had to rush for a train!)--
Poster design: on a personal level I'd be very keen to contribute towards future poster designs. It's surprising the impact that can be had with just black & white and maybe another colour (green tends to be a favourite...).
Creativity in general. I really think this website could have a gallery of artwork, poster designs etc that people send in (see also my comments under John Sinha's post on Ideas for improving the forum). We could invite absolutely anyone to contribute - from professional adult artists to children - and just display them online as a resource. Maybe they could be cycled through on the mainpage too. It's just another way of getting public consciousness piqued. And then we could select one of the designs to take further, as a poster concept.
Just a word re. 'tension' in marches. I guess what this boils down to is framing the issue correctly. In other words, we can simply march against climate change, which is fine; AND we can have other events where this agenda is more closely related to practical policies that contradict our Kyoto targets. We have to puncture hypocrisies, highlight the lack of 'joined-up' thinking on climate change...
Such as: a) airport expansion, b) road building, c) new power stations. Targeting such areas would, yes, probably lead to more confrontation (tho always peacable). But at the same time we should always outline the better alternatives to what we are protesting against: respectively, a) better British and European train networks to replace short-distance flights, b) better public transport to ease road congestion, c) huge investment in renewables.
Last London meeting munutes
The minutes for the last London meeting are
http://forum.campaigncc.org/?q=londonminutes20051214.
We didn't get very far on the forward looking stuff.
GW facts tie-in campaign to Al Gore’s Live Earth Concerts
The public needs accurate information on GW that is unfiltered by the news media. Al Gore’s July 7, 2007 Live Earth Concerts will provide the next big opportunity to reach the world about GW. The website www.liveearthproducts.net proposes a way that the Live Earth Concerts (www.liveearth.org) can market products whose labels would present accurate and up-to-date GW information to hundreds of millions of people worldwide.
It is very unlikely that Al Gore is yet aware of the campaign. I hope that anyone who has access to him, or who knows someone with access to him, will let Mr. Gore know about the “Live Earth Products†proposal.
Tsk, tsk, this is TOO lighthearted !
I need to give you a bit of a tsk, tsk, because that post is WAY TOO lighthearted !
This is GLOBAL WARMING we're talking about. Like the fate of humankind and just about every other living thing EVER on the face of the entire EARTH EVER.
Hmph.
THE GOOD OLD AMERICAN WAY
I have read the business proposal on the Live Earth Products site and would respectfully comment that the design style and message delivery of the packaging is suitable for North American consumers only. Although personally repelled by (I agree with Jo) what I perceive as a jazzy and upbeat trivialisation of GW issues, I also accept that the US is a very different animal commercially to the rest of the world. Somewtimes to make headway on difficult issues you need a Trojan Horse. This is what I think is offered by this business concept. So not all bad really. Just a bit of a sad reflection on an idol-driven popular culture.
Flipside Vision