Exam 2 Review

SPCM 3320: Environmental Communication

Professor Kelly E. Happe

Chapter 6:
How and why did the introduction of risk into policy discussions change
the way the government protects the public from environmental harm?
p190

Term that comes from book of the same name by social theorist Ulrich
Beck. We are a risk society (and not merely a group of specific groups
sometimes exposed to localized risks) because we are all exposed to large-scale
risks. These risks very significant - some can lead to widespread destruction of
human and animal life, as in the case of nuclear energy (our case study for this
week), chemical pollution (what Sandra Steingraber describes as ), and
climate change.

Although Cox does not mention this, what was also significant about
Becks book was its description of risk as a knowledge which requires that
experts, broadly defined, play interpretive roles for the lay public. This has
entailed a fairly significant rearranging of what he calls social and political
positions and their respective power.

Here is a quotation from Becks book:

[Risks] induce systematic and often irreversible harm, generally remain
invisible, are based on causal interpretations, and thus initially only exist in
terms of the (scientific or anti-scientific) knowledge about them. They can
thus be changed, magnified, dramatized or minimized within knowledge, and
to that extent they are particularly open to social definition and construction.
Hence the mass media and the scientific and legal professions in charge of
defining risks become key social and political positions. (Beck 1992, 23)
Define and explain risk assessment. Explain the 4 -step process that it
entails.
Risk assessment: the evaluation of the degree of harm or danger from some
condition such as exposure to a toxic chemical
Risk assessment entails::

is a quantitative concept

is the expected annual mortality (or other severity) that results from
some condition, such as exposure to chemical substance

usually concerns risk for cancer - is a significant limitation to risk

assessment!

occurs within the technical sphere of research labs and

communication among experts such as toxicologists, epidemiologists, and other
scientists.
involves 4-step process: hazard identification, exposure assessment,
dose-response assessment, and risk characterization (review Figure 6.1 on
page 193).
Note: limitations to dose-response: risk assessment sometimes still relies on a dose
makes the poison model which does not accurately reflect how bodies react to

exposures to toxic chemicals

Hazard identification- Review key research to identify any potential
health problems that a chemical can cause
exposure assessment- determine the amount, duration and pattern of
exposure to the chemical
dose-response assessment Estimate how much of the chemical it
would tke to cause varying degrees of health effects that could lead to
illnesses
risk characterization- Assess the risk for the chemical to cause cancer
or other illnesses in the general population
Chapter 6 instructs us to think of risk as socially constructed, which is to
say that it has no one meaning for all persons in all situations. (This why
communication about risk is so important - think of the constitutive
function of language). Answer the following questions: how does this
understanding of risk help make sense of the opening quotation of
Chapter 6: Those who control the discourse on risk will most likely
control the political battles as well. Who exactly are the people most
likely to control the discourse on risk? In other words, who controls what
risk means, when it is actionable?
Stakeholders- consumers, scientists, etc- those who have some kind of interest in
the topic.
Acceptable risk became a term and we talked about how to protect the public from
risk and how to manage those risks and lower them as much as possible.
example UGA beyond coal
Define and explain the technical sphere. In what ways does this differ
from the public sphere? (you can also draw from the material in the
lecture notes on nuclear power).
Happens in specialized journals, not meant for public consumption, communication
between scientists and experts that share the same kinds of assumptions.
(Complex, difficult concept)
it is assumed to have no history; if the public understands the social, economic, and
political context which made nuclear energy possible, it is easier to insist that other
factors other than technological know-how inform the debate about nuclear power.
How do the so-called outrage factors explain why various publics have
challenged the technical model of risk? (Complex, difficult concept)
Examples are important! Feel free to email Dr. Happe. People are outraged when
they are exposed to risk that they did not voluntarily commit to.
Outrage refers collectively to those factors that the public considers in assessing
whether their exposure to a hazard is acceptable.
Main outrage factors that Sandman believed people consider in judging an
environmental hazard.
Voluntariness
Control

Fairness
Process
Diffusion in time and space

This model is useful in calling our attention to the experiences of a community that
might be left out of technical calculation. also suggests the difference that might
result from enlarging the public sphere for the assessment of risk to include affected
groups.
Challenged by critics. Suggested that this definition characterizes scientific or
technical assessments of hazards as rational and the emotion outrage of
communities as irrational. They fear that such characterizations can be used to
marginalize or trivialize community voices in debates about risk.
What is the definition of cultural rationality? How exactly does it challenge
the technical model of risk? And what does Cox mean when he says this
alternative model challenges the symbolic legitimacy boundaries of
technical agencies the their methods?
risk is not limited to mortality
In lecture notes. Table 6-1 in textbook is also helpful.
Overview: this model challenges the technical model in the following ways: its
reliance on quantitative data; how risk assessors define acceptable risk; the eclipse
of the public sphere by the technical sphere; risk assessments assumption that
risks should be managed/reduced not eliminated
Cultural rationality and risk
Cultural rationality is a type of knowledge that includes personal, familiar, and
social concerns in evaluating a real risk event. As distinct from technical analysis of
risk, cultural rationality is shaped by the circumstances under which the risk is
identified and publicized, the standing or place of the individual in his or her
community, and the social values of the community as a whole cultural rationality
includes folk wisdom, the insights of peer groups, traditions, and understanding of
how risk impacts ones family and community, and sensitivity to particular events as
well as overall patterns.
tech agencies think in terms of probability and number not emotions
Define and explain technical risk communication. What are its
objectives? What are some of its benefits? Its drawbacks?
Technical risk comm: the translation of technical data about environmental or
health risks for public consumption, with the goal of educating a target audience
(202)
Objectives of technical risk communication:

Inform: after identification of hazard is made, goal is to assess

knowledge of the targeted audience, assess means by which audience can be
educated. This communication is one-way.

change: goal is sometimes to change a risk behavior

example of health communication research in the Department of
Communication Studies

assure: this generally means assuring a community that a risk is

acceptably

 example of limit of technical risk communication: VX nerve

agent (see FYI box, pg 204). This also shows limit of public comment
Hazards

Importantly, technical risk communication is based upon assumption of

the public as irrational, hysteria-prone

fails to acknowledge concerns of individuals intimately affected

How might we think about the failures of technical risk communication as
the failure of bringing knowledge produced in the technical sphere into
public sphere deliberations about policy? Bonus question: is the takeaway
lesson from Three Mile Island that experts need to just be better communicators?
if tech communicators fail or not properly inform, by being opinions leaders, this
divulges into public sphere talk thus delves into policy debates
Using nuclear energy and the crises around particular plants as examples, how
have the crises involving nuclear energy (for example, the meltdown at Three
Mile Island) shown the limitations of both the technical model of risk and
technical risk communication (from the perspective of the culturalexperiential model)? What is the importance of cultural approaches to
risk communication? If the cultural-experiential model of risk communication had
been the dominant/accepted model, how might things have gone differently? Would
we even have nuclear power? Why is it that the public seemed to accept
nuclear power in the first place?
obviously arent communicating well enough or with the publics emotions about risk
in mind

Chapter 7:
What are the modes of environmental advocacy?
A. modes of environmental advocacy (another way of saying forms of
communication). Can include public education, campaigns to influence
environmental legislation in Congress, community organizing, boycotts, and direct
action protests such as sit-ins and hanging bangers from corporate buildings.
Review Table 7.1 on page 228
What is the difference between a primary and secondary audience?

primary vs. secondary audiences: primary audience is the decision makers

who have the authority to act, and secondary audiences include segments of
the public, coalition partners, opinion leaders, and the media
Why is it important to mobilize the secondary audience in order to hold
the primary audience accountable?

mobilizing support to hold decision makers accountable: key assumption is

that the decision makers are in fact, accountable to voters, the media, and
other groups (q: are corporations accountable?)
Why is it that the persuadables are often the most important targets in
environmental advocacy campaigns?
the public is important and consists of a) the campaigns base; b) the opponents

of the campaign; and c) the persuadables. Persuadables are often important

targets; they are initially undecided, either because of lack of knowledge, or
awareness of competing, yet compelling arguments
What are the three sets of values that are connected to environmental
behavior? Which do you believe are the most important to appeal to?
Values that are connected to environmental behavior:

Egoistic concerns focusing on the self

Social-altruistic concerns focusing on other people-most important

Biospheric concerns focusing on the well-being of living things ex.Zuni

Salt Lake
Taking the Beyond Coal campaign here at UGA as an example, what do
the organizers of this campaign do well? What could they learn from
Chapter 7?

Chapter 8:
What are the three components to environmental justice?
I. environmental justice refers to 1) calls to recognize and halt the disproportionate
burdens imposed on poor and minority communities by environmentally harmful
conditions (environmental racism); 2) more inclusive opportunities for those who are
most affected to be heard in the decisions made by public agencies and the wider
environmental movement; and 3) a vision of environmentally healthy, economically
sustainable communities
How is the phrase environmental racism an example of both the
pragmatic and constitutive functions of language
For the latter, review Chapters 1 & 2
Pragmatic (pg 20)- educates, alerts, persuades, mobilizes, and helps us to solve
environmental problems
Constitutive- compose representations of nature and environmental problems as
subjects for our understandings.
Environmental racism- definition on 268.- pattern of locating toxins in poor and
minority neighborhoods
How is it that the Group of Ten national environmental groups came to be
the source of a dominant discourse about the environment, to which
environmental justice groups needed to produce an insurgent discourse as
a response?
h) SouthWest Organizing Project; open letter to the Group of Ten (national,
mainstream environmental groups); letter gained considerable media attention
link to the letter:
http://www.swop.net/node/26
-it accused mainstream environ orgs of racism in their hiring and envn policies
This letter very interesting because challenges mainstream groups unreflective
criticism of economic development and use of public lands

Read over the Principles of Environmental Justice that were produced

during the First National People of Color Environmental Leadership
Summit. Pick a rhetorical concept with which to analyze the language
used in the document. Which would you choose and why?
i) the First National People of Color Environmental Leadership Summit (1991)
1. Principles of Environmental Justice
link to the document:

http://www.ejnet.org/ej/principles.html
p270
2. critical rhetoric component: articulating, or linking principles of social
justice with environmental protection; making the latter part of civil rights
discourse
3. example: at the Summit, documentary film showing pollution of air
and water, of historic communities being abandoned because so badly
polluted, and images of the Ku Klux Klan burning crosses in the 1960s
4. importance of speaking truthfully and forcefully; power to define the
issues and the stakeholders (story of Kim Bobo bringing together biblical
story of Deborah with the movement for economic and work justice - at
WAGG 2011 conference; example of Occupation Wall Street)
What is indecorous voice. How does the implicit/explicit charge of
indecorous voice limit the participation of some persons in discourse
about the environment in ways that, say, legal sanctions do not?
Why this is a communication issue: is a matter of who actually gets to participate in
the public sphere, who gets to have a voice. This is not just a matter of physical,
legal restrictions. These are restrictions resulting from the imposition of
institutional/social/cultural norms governing speech.
a. explanation of indecorous voice: the symbolic framing by some public
officials of the voices of members of the public as inappropriate to the
norms for speaking in regulatory forums and for the level of knowledge
demanded by health and government agencies (277). Examples: Rose Marie
Augustine

Related to norms of technical discourse; official public sphere;

decorum, a public speaking norm is usually defined as that which is fitting
for a particular audience or occasion. How did you learn about this in your
public speaking classes? How does this sometimes serve to exclude persons
from speaking in public forums?

Acceptable risk and indecorous voice; what Cox describes as

the epistemic standing of persons (as distinguished from, say, legal standing).
Example: Charlotte Keyes and her claim: The evidence is in my body! How
and why did this serve to discount her? To deny her credibility?
How might we expand the notion of indecorous voice? In other words, in what
other ways might someones voice be construed as indecorous leading to their
exclusion from participation in the public sphere?

Janisse Rays Ecology of a Cracker Childhood

Who is her audience(s)? Is she a successful communicator about the
environment? Why or why not?
Audience: She was basically appealing to her base, or people who were already
sympathetic to the preservation of GAs natural resources that would buy the book
(Asas dad). Also groups of people who are inclined to be sympathetic and are
reminded to rethink consumerist habits and think more about sustainability.
What is a memoir? What are the strengths and weaknesses of this genre
as a mode of environmental communication?
A memoir made the story more real to people, unlike scientific facts and names.
When she talks about her family, it gives people a reason to care unlike scientific
information. People tend to skim over scientific facts. It was effective because you
were more likely to read the book and then digest and understand the science,
which may not have happened otherwise. It gave her credibility because she
actually experienced these things (ethos). Logos would be the part where she
makes reasonable arguments (clear cutting and alternatives to clear cutting).
Chapters where trees are talking and theres no people there at all.
Given what we know about John Muir and a particular discourse of
wilderness, preservation, and conservation, in what ways is Ray part of
this tradition? In what ways does she depart from it?

Documentary Taking Root

1. How were the women in the film denied their right to have a voice in the public
sphere? How does the concept indecorous voice help us understand how this
denial happened?
2. What role did gender play in denying them this right?
3. How did the women in the film attempt to overcome the obstacles to having a
voice and participating fully in decisions about the environment? What was the
importance of self-knowledge? How was the park in Nairobi a particular kind of
public sphere?
6. What is the significance of the metaphor roots?
-roots: trees have roots, it was a grassroots campaign, and they were trying to
convey their roots