![]() |
|
![]() |
|
free-range thinking · july 2000
How do you interest people in an issue as complex as genetically engineered food? If you're John Beske and Jim Slama, you begin by writing a play starring a nine-foot tall vegetable. It's high noon in Chicago, and on this chilly November day a crowd of about a hundred people has gathered in Federal Plaza, smack in the heart of the city's business district, to gawk at a gigantic ear of corn. The eerily oversized ear is actually a costume for "Corn Man," a character in a piece of street theater which is about to dramatize the dangers of genetically engineered food. Just moments earlier, John Beske, the local activist who conceived the piece (and now serves as its narrator), delivered this cue for Corn Man's dramatic entrance:
As the story unfolds, a swarm of monarch butterflies (portrayed by children) flutters into view and begins flying around Corn Man. One by one the tiny creatures fall to the ground, writhe in pain, and die - unintended victims of the corn's poison. "Are we going to let this happen?" Beske demands of the onlookers. The crowd shouts back, "No!" and as they begin chanting "Butterflies, yes! Frankenfoods, no!" several cameras and microphones record their reaction. In the days that follow, Corn Man, the baby butterflies, and the story they told will appear in Time, People, and The New York Times; on ABC, CBS, CNN, and NPR; and in dozens of local newspapers across the country. The industry trade publication Chemical Week will even feature Corn Man on its cover with the caption, "Killer Corn Not the Label that Biotech Wants." And all of this exposure will have cost Beske and his compatriots less than $1,000.
Such is the potential impact of street theater. Done well, it can generate as much public awareness and outrage as a multimillion-dollar advertising campaign. "It forces people to look at an issue," says Beske (rhymes with pesky), who works as creative director for Sustain, a public interest environmental group based in Chicago. The group's president, Jim Slama (rhymes with drama), is also a believer. "It captures people's attention and gives easily understood images that elicit an emotional response," he says. "And if you engage people on an emotional level, you're much more likely to get them to buy in and actually do something." The pesky drama John and Jim produced had the desired impact because it maximized all the important elements of issue-oriented street theater: Right Place Right Timing Right Approach Beske and Slama are rightfully proud of the media coverage they attracted, but they still have their eyes trained on the real goal. "We're in the middle of the corn and soybean belt," Slama said, "and GE seed sales are down about twenty to twenty-five percent this year. I think our protests probably had a small impact on that." (For current information on Sustain's campaign for higher safety standards and labeling of genetically engineered food, go to www.keepnatural.org.)
How Important is One Word? (In a word: very.) Pat Mitchell, the new president of PBS, is imposing a $1 fine on any colleague who refers to the network as "dysfunctional." That's not to say PBS is really one big happy family, but the d-word had taken such hold within the network that dysfunctionality was becoming an accepted norm. "I think language reflects the way you think," Mitchell recently told the Los Angeles Times, and she may have been drawing on her experience at CNN. Ted Turner, Mitchell's previous boss, banned the use of the word "foreign" in favor of "international." G. Clotaire Rapaille, an expert in archetype research, studies words to help companies market more effectively. "Nearly every word we know has an emotional response," Rapaille contends. After analyzing the way people feel about trees he concluded, "For Americans, trees are human beings. We hug them. They are raised in nurseries." Provided with this insight, the Timber Association of California changed its name to the California Forestry Association. So, the next time the word "nonprofit" is about to pop out of your mouth, think twice. Is that the best way to describe what your organization is and does? Perhaps it's time nonprofit took its place on the etymological shelf next to its predecessor, charity. Something for public interest groups working in the quality of life sector to consider, anyway.
Copyright © 2000 by Andy Goodman, All Rights Reserved.
|