Global Warming: A Challenge for Performers

Global Warming: A Challenge for Performers

On Nov. 4th an estimated 100,000 Australians took to the streets as part of the International Day of Action on Climate Change "Walk Against Warming". To coincide with that day, at least 250 actors/performers, agents, techies, and others in the entertainment industry posted letters to the government and opposition expressing their concern about Global Warming and calling for serious action to tackle what is potentially the most urgent problem facing the planet. Some would say it IS the most urgent problem.

The support from the entertainment community for the letter campaign which I instigated, was fantastic. Many people expressed their thanks for my setting it all up and "making it easy to actually do something"! It's also nice to know that the original letters have been changed by people (not in our industry), to reflect their work, and who felt they wanted to add their voices. As far as I know the letters are still circulating.

Several months ago I asked, via the MEAA email if any actors/performers were interested in setting up a discussion group to look at what we as people in the entertainment industry, could do about global warming, . I'm sorry to say the response was pretty dismal. But, the response to the letter campaign has assured me that their are many of us who do care about the subject and want to do something about it.

I'm going to start a discussion here and now by suggesting that one of the major things we have to do is look at our indirect but specific contribution to Global Warming, through the work we do in advertising, be it 100%ers or voice-overs.

This is a very difficult subject because many of us earn, if not a huge living from commercials (although some do), then at least a contribution to the household budget. Often, the only financial contribution we make. The 'big ad' can be a life saver, sort of, and the steady stream of regular voice-over work or T.V. commercials can be the only 'performing' one might get to do for quite some time. As we know the industry is in pretty dire straights across the board when it comes to the amount of work that is available and calling your self an actor - or singer or dancer- when you haven't been in a show for a couple of years or on TV seems a little heartbreaking. So to challenge this area of work is quite a big issue but, I feel one that must be looked at, because our faces, voices and personalities are at the forefront of consumerism and as such we help sell many of the products which either through the process of their production or in themselves are contributing to Global Warming.

The problem we face with ads is either general or specific.

What I mean is that ads in 'general' are about increasing consumption ( or at least tempting us to buy), which has inherent problems for the planet with things like power and energy and waste. The problems of ads in a 'specific' sense, is that they may be for large gas guzzling cars or inefficient appliances, say. (One could throw into the mix the whole notion of ethics on other levels as well, but they are inherent in what I am arguing here anyway.)

The problem is that we very seldom get to question what the ad is actually doing. On the other hand even if one has a level of concern about content the script might not be available until after turning up for the job. We have no input into what is said or shown. We might get asked to do things that we don't feel particularly good about, but, "what the hell, I'm here now I might as well do it and ..... think of the money!"

We have been in a situation for many years where there was no need to question much of what ads do, -although many women have been conscious of the way they may be portrayed or used and have refused to do ads because of their concern about such images. As a general rule however, the concern over ads has come, not from within the industry but from the public or 'interested' groups, . Ours is usually a shared acknowledgement that they are often a pain to do, sometimes a little embarrassing, occasionally good fun and .......well, "think of the money". But we don't really question them, the content, the product. Of course, not all ads are bad as far as the environment goes, but perhaps now is the time we have to seriously start questioning what it is we are advertising. What is the effect of the product we are trying to sell when it comes to the environment? Or, well let's take it into ethics, how does the extolling and constant urging to buy effect poorer people in society, or the life chickens have to suffer to supply the fast food industry? You see, I think there was a time when there was no need to question, there was so much to go around and it seemed that we all could have pretty much everything, (and of course poor people were looked after and chickens were for the most part free range.) And even though I'm sure the government and business leaders would like us to keep thinking that way - for the sake of the growth of the economy - we have to acknowledge it is no longer the same world. It never really was that world anyway. Nothing in the universe grows and grows forever. To a human lifetime many things may seem to go on and on, but that is more the fault of our perceptions and perhaps our egos. The simple fact is that there are limits to growth and in the opinion of many, those limits has been reached. We are now all responsible for what happens to the world we live in.

As if we don't have enough to cope with!

It is a very difficult thing I'm suggesting here, but I think we have to seriously start questioning what it is we are being asked to do with every ad or voice-over, because everything we do in life has some sort of environmental impact. It may be minuscule, it may be large. But, how can we as performers be expected to know what the environmental impact of a product is when it comes to greenhouse gasses? Should performers be given a disclosure of the 'embedded carbon' with every item, service or object they are being hired to sell, which would thus allow for an informed decision? How does one make a decision about advertising a product which was invented for 'professional' use but which is unnecessary in the home where the product advertising is being aimed?(vacuum sealers for food, for example). Should we in fact be involved in a dialogue with advertisers to try and come up with a 'standard' to work towards, a standard that puts the environment before 'sexiness' for instance?

The issues brought up by Global Warming, when looked at in fine detail, reveal many layers. These layers reflect much of our society, everything from wasteful consumption to unethical treatment of animals, from blatant disregard for anyone but oneself to the gap between the haves and the haves-not. I admit to being on the pessimistic side on this subject. Having been involved with environmental issues since the 1970's I have heard how long the warnings have been going on and observed how little has been done. I admit there is a certain comfort in seeing the rapid shift in direction our government has made on the subject in just the last few weeks, a 180 degree turn, in fact. And even though the steps they are taking fall short of the mark, the publicity and focus on the subject will hopefully mean many more individuals will be spurred into making changes to reduce their personal impact on the planet. But the power of the individual to effect change is enhanced when the individual is part of a group - that's what unions are about of course - and when that group is able to effect change within it's sphere of influence the repercussions can be quite dramatic. When you consider that the area in which we are involved - media and entertainment - has such a close contact with people (we are in their living rooms) and has an almost ever present opportunity through our voices and images and actions to influence people's choices, then perhaps now is the time we should start to seriously question the whole area of advertising and our role in promoting a carbon hungry world.

I'm talking here about ads because of their influence on consumerism. Of course many ads are quite innocuous, but there are an equal number, if not more, that, as I suggest above, when looked at through the lens of global warming and climate change become far from innocuous. We need to look at Climate Change therefore, not only in our private life but our working life too. As an industry we need to seriously consider the impact we have. As individuals we need to be informed to enable ourselves to be discerning about what work we accept by considering it in the light of climate change, not just in the light of 'how much money am I getting?' Should we in fact be involved in dialogue with advertisers to try and come up with a 'standard' to work towards, a standard that puts the environment before 'sexiness' for instance?

I hope these few words on this important subject can start a dialogue between ourselves. Can help us as an industry, contribute in a very positive way to finding solutions to this very big issue.