The art of debate intrigues me. In the media and information age that we live in, the person who best persuades the public, wins. Statistics can be used on both sides – so the real talent is not spouting off facts to lend support to your argument (the American public is too dumb for that), but to give good "spin".
As the recent movie, “Thank You for Smoking” illustrates, the art of persuasion is a lucrative business (great movie by the way). The movie's plot provides insight into why a company needs a great spokesperson. They can make or break your company. And it’s a lesson that environmentalists need better training in. Maybe the "spin" talent can't be learned, but at the very least, environmentalists need to hire "spin" specialists to make a more convincing argument for such an important cause. Case in point: A CNBC Morning Call debate was featured last Friday (April 24). The topic: “Can the economy prosper without harming the environment?”
I’d give you the link to read more, but CNBC apparently didn’t give the ~4 minute “debate” enough importance for it to be documented, except to list the speakers on its daily guest list: Kert Davies from Greenpeace USA
Sounds worth tuning in for, huh? The debate had potential, but it was hardly a debate -- it was a slaughter. Kenneth Green was eloquent and gave great “spin”. He appeared logical and believable and made points that resonated with the business-minded CNBC audience. And I hate the guy. Kert Davies from Greenpeace USA, on the other hand, was all over the place. He personally attacked Kenneth Green and his company for being funded by Exxon and other large corporations. I’m sure Davies’ claims were true, but he appeared emotional and a political radical – something that didn’t resonate with the conservative audience members AT ALL. Even the CNBC moderator, Mark Hanes, had to butt into the Davies' emotional tirade and say something to the effect of: “You better make a logical argument soon, Mr. Davies, or I’m going to have to call ‘10’ and declare you knocked out”. If Greenpeace wants to be taken more seriously with Corporate America, they have to argue about business incentives. What do corporations have to gain by becoming environmentally compliant? Talk about the money savings of energy efficiency, or how companies can avoid costly fines by implementing better measurement and reporting tools. Anything about money and shareholder value will cause the big guns of corporate America to sit up and take notice.
Greenpeace: wake up and take a few lessons from the enemy. A good place to start: Wal-Mart - “Greenwashers” extraordinaire.
Erin Swanson
ESwanson@enviance.com | 
