I’ve never really understood the concept of owning property. Apart of attaining a piece of paper that says, “This land is yours,” I don’t envision land as something one can claim. Land belongs to everyone – which is why peoples’ right to know is so important when it comes to environmental issues. In the third chapter of Environmental Communication, writer Robert Cox addresses the legal rights people have and how they can directly participate in the decision-making process with environmental decisions. As Cox described the right to know, the right to comment on proposals, and the right of standing in court, I couldn’t help but feel that these rights are not being practiced to their full potential. Either journalists are not doing their job of informing the public or corporations and businesses are not being upfront about planned proposals because it seems that public participation only occurs once a decision has been made. I can be completely wrong; this is just the impression I get from my observations. The book discusses how there should be transparency and accountability, but this doesn’t seem to show up until it’s too late.
In Chapter 4 Cox explains that the public starts to feel these exact frustrations with the lack of transparency. This starts a trend toward alternative forms of addressing environmental issues. As more conservative court decisions started to make it harder for the public to acquire the right of standing in court, people tried different approaches to communication. People start to collaborate with others that are more like-minded, creating partnerships among people working toward the same goal. When I first thought of what Cox was discussing, a potential problem came to mind: What if everyone is already on the same page? Groupthink is a very dangerous thing. And it doesn’t matter how effective the communication may be, if the people with the money, or in other words the ones making the decisions, aren’t at the table then the collaboration may very well be for nothing. Collaboration is also not always possible – when has someone pro-choice ever agreed with a pro-lifer on abortion?
Discussion Questions:
-How would environmental advocacy have been different if the Supreme Court didn’t “issue a series of conservative rulings that narrowed the basis for citizens’ standing”?
-In what ways is collaboration effective, ineffective?
