What Makes Climate Communicator George Marshall Tick?

Who is George Marshall? And why is he devoting his life to getting people around the world to talk in new ways about climate change?

NEW YORK, N.Y. — George Marshall, in suit pants and fedora, looks like a distracted businessman, but in fact he’s a missionary in a cultural crusade to get people to talk about climate change. And he has no fear of hostile retorts.

In a restaurant in New York City, on one of his infrequent trips from Wales, he recently dropped his menu, stood up, and stepped over to the next table. “Excuse me, is that salad good?” The diners looked surprised, but they said that yes, it was. They chatted. Marshall left them smiling, returned to his table, and promptly ordered what they had — the Cobb salad.

That’s exactly the way Marshall, co-founder of the Climate Outreach and Information Network, COIN, and climatedenial.org, a blog about the psychology of climate change denial, tackles the problem to which he’s devoted his life. He’ll walk up to complete strangers and ask them what they think about the topic that many prefer not to talk about anymore — the changing climate.

He says it’s his “personal passion” to talk to those who don’t agree with his contention that the majority of scientists are right about the rate of and reasons for the rapid warming.

He believes that unless everyone starts talking about the rapid changes in the climate, problems will get worse, and that communicators have to branch out, reaching audiences often not adequately considered.

Marshall, 49, works as a consultant, speaker, and writer, and he urges people to look at climate change from new angles. He sees himself as an outsider in many political landscapes, with interests in some aspects of both conservative and liberal political agendas.

He lives in Wales with his American-born wife, Annie Levy, and their school-age daughter and son. They rarely fly because of the high carbon footprint. “We’ve become niche specialists in talking to new audiences,” Marshall says. COIN’s clients have included large trade unions in the U.K. such as the Communication Workers Union and the Public and Commercial Services Union. COIN is working on a climate change communication program with the government of Wales, and Marshall has been testing ways of talking about the issue with groups there. Focus group participants reacted most positively to a “woo-woo” set of statements and slogans such as, “There are things in life that are more important than just money …. such as the time you spend with your friends, and family, and community,” the test slogan went.

“We seek to actively develop programs with constituencies that are outside the current climate change discussion,” Marshall says. “We proactively seek them out.”

Society’s ‘Negotiated Silence’ … and Need for a ‘Very Hard Prod’

Marshall: Some people would rather discuss spinach tart than engage on climate change.

In his work as a consultant for governments and organizations about climate change, Marshall draws on his earlier work as an activist against destructive logging in Papua, New Guinea. He says now that although protests can be disruptive, he believes they have an important place in society — including in the work he’s doing now, prodding, as he puts it, large institutions and governments to change their climate policies. It’s an issue Marshall wrote about – the role of radical protests in policy changes — in the Guardian newspaper earlier this year.

No longer a protester himself, Marshall says large institutions, including governments, need  ”a very, very hard prod” to change their climate policies and rhetoric. “I think it is a huge mistake for people to say radical action is no way to change things.”

On the Other Hand, Like Attracts Like Interests

Some years ago, Marshall got out of forest activism after 15 years. He turned to the broader matter of the climate because he decided that most countries suffer with language challenges. He has addressed people from around the world on how best to talk about the climate with their peers. On the same trip that took him to the New York restaurant where he talked to The Yale Forum, Marshall had given a speech to a group of more than 100 in Venezuela, chatted about world temperatures with antique car-buyers in northern California, and, the next day, was on his way to interview victims of Hurricane Sandy in New Jersey.

“My core contention is that climate change is a contested narration that is shaped by social negotiation,” he says. The problem, as Marshall frames it, is so bad now that people just don’t talk. Climate change frightens them, Marshall says.

And, just as he walked up to the couple at the restaurant, Marshall goes up to almost anyone he sees in public and asks about climate change.

He sees himself involved in a continuing social experiment — currently not going too well in the sense that people are not wanting to talk to him. “I might go up to four people sitting together,” he says. “I say, I’m over here and I’m writing an article for a British newspaper, and they’ll go, ‘Hey that’s really interesting.’ I’ll say, ‘I’m going all around America asking people what they think about climate change. Bang. Boom. The void opens. Three of them instantly turn away and start their own conversation.”

Something like that happens regularly as he asks groups about climate change. “I do it constantly,” he says.

Flying Too Much Vs. ‘A Lovely Spinach Tart’

One of his favorite examples of a social interchange killing a potential discussion of climate change is one that he describes in his book Carbon Detox. (Marshall this year is writing another book about how to get the climate change message across.)

The story involves a man who was at a fancy dinner party with retired professionals. Marshall goes on: “He raised the issue of how could they possibly fly so much, and they were completely silent. No one said anything until someone said, ‘What a delicious spinach tart.’ And then they spent the next 10 minutes talking about spinach tart — in obsessive detail. It wasn’t just a random thing. Spinach tart became climate change. ‘What a lovely spinach tart. Where did you get the spinach? I must have the recipe.’”

It’s an unusual turn of conversation, but Marshall says it happens because climate change remains a specialty topic, a subject some find uncomfortable. Back in 2007, Marshall searched for the words “climate change” on websites of major human rights organizations such as Amnesty International, YWCA, Oxfam US, and others. He found few or no mentions of the term. He also searched for innocuous words like “donkey” or “ice cream” as controls for his experiment. He says no single site back then mentioned climate change more often than it did donkeys or ice cream. (A quick Yale Forum check finds the term “climate change” cropping up a number of times now on Amnesty International’s site.)

Marshall’s point: the subject of climate change remains for many an uncommon one. “The question,” Marshall asks, “is: Why?”

He answers. “In society as a whole — and I think this applies at a micro level in individuals and peer groups and institutions — I think there is a deliberately negotiated silence on climate change. And in this regard I draw strongly on the research of people who have looked at the generation of silence as a sociological discipline, especially in regard to human rights.”

Marshall believes that the way societies respond now to climate change mirrors the way they respond to human rights abuses: with silence. “That is not to say they are the same thing,” he says.

Might a psychologist (amateur or not) call this denial? Marshall agrees, adding that a Freudian psychoanalyst would call it “disavowal.” He mentions the book The Elephant in the Room: Silence and Denial in Everyday Life by Eviatar Zerubavel. It covers the topic of people who do not connect themselves in any way with the body of information about the climate.

“Disavowal would be a state of both knowing and not knowing,” Marshall says. “Selective recognition. It’s not ignorance. It’s not outright denial.”

Training Conservatives to Talk to Conservatives

Marshall seems bent on undoing the old fight between those who accept climate change science and those who steadfastly resist it. But making peace there means talking to the “other side.”

Within the past year, Marshall has visited Texas and sought members of the Tea Party in that state. He does it because he wants to figure out how to talk to them about the climate. “I don’t understand American politics,” he says. “I ask people in the Tea Party where they got their ideas.” They have cited talk shows and news programs.

“The Tea Party is a genuine movement, a radical social movement that I can only dream of for climate change,” he says.

Taking a lesson from that dream, Marshall lays out his strategies as a climate consultant and as a writer and speaker. “I don’t want to give a speech to a conservative audience,” he says. “I want a conservative to do that. My interest is in finding a conservative to do it.”

It’s not that he wants to turn all people interested in the environment into conservatives. “But I want conservatives to understand and get climate change as an issue, to be actively involved in shaping a conservative narrative, and I think that environmentalists can help that process to happen.” The way that will happen, he thinks, involves shaping new stories and new language so that messengers can speak to whatever audience they’re trying to reach.

What Journalists Should Do

Marshall thinks the news media should boldly jump into the worldwide dialogue about the climate of the future. But he thinks too that they should try some new tactics.

He likes to say that journalism since the dawn of the World Wide Web has changed radically, to the point where it’s even hard to define. In that spirit, he says journalists should write for audiences they might already know but may not consider among their principal or normal audiences.

Belong to a religious organization? Then consider writing about the climate for your religious magazine or website, Marshall recommends. Like to fish? Write about the climate for your favorite fishing magazine.

“There’s limited value in writing for a liberal outlet complaining about how appalling it is that so many people deny climate change,” he says with a hint of exasperation. “What is that achieving? You could maybe work for a liberal outlet and say, ‘This is how as individuals we can help to overcome this and persuade others.’ Part of the silence or the meta-silence is that we do not feel confident or empowered to bring up any of these subjects.”

Marshall says many people never find it “appropriate” to discuss climate change so it’s the task those in the communication business to make it so.

“I think any time you have a conversation with anyone about the weather you should bring climate change into the conversation, not in a hectoring, judgmental, on-your-soapbox way but just drop it in there every single time. ‘Weird weather we’re having …. yeah well, personally, I believe it’s climate change and that something weird has been going on. And it’s been getting weirder.’ Just put it out there.”

But most of the time in these talks he has with strangers, Marshall says, they just stop talking. That doesn’t matter, he says. Just putting it out there helps “establish staging points in that void where it is acceptable to talk about it.”

Other links of interest

In this article for the New Internationalist, George Marshall reminisces about his life as a teenager in 1972 in England. He looks ahead to similar low-carbon lives.

Marshall gives advice on how to talk to a climate-change denier and describes on his blog “The Ingenious Ways We Avoid Believing in Climate Change.” His organization, COIN, works closely with a U.K-based collaborative talkingclimate.org and with the Wales-based Public Interest Research Centre.

Christine Woodside

Christine Woodside is a freelance writer living in Deep River, Connecticut. She is a regular contributor to The Yale Forum. (E-mail: christine@yaleclimatemediaforum.org, Twitter: @chriswoodside)
Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to What Makes Climate Communicator George Marshall Tick?

  1. Jackson Haddock says:

    I am looking for advice on how to handle climate change deniers that want to focus in on anthropogenic global warming and thermometers. I try telling them that they are relying on imperfect human interpretations of heat measuring instruments, and rather they should empower themselves and acknowledge that their “guts” are telling them there is “climate change” and therefore humans must be warming the global climate. They call me “sophist” and “pathetic” and show patronizing looks towards me and then start trying to mention forbidden things to me like the alleged wizardry behind “positive feedback.” Advice??

    • meltyman says:

      Yes: read the papers published by bona fide scientists with reputations to lose in respected reputable journals that have reputations to lose. If you see something that you disagree with, write a rebuttal — including your alternative explanation for the observations and the supporting data — and send it to the journal. Then come back here with the link to the article, explaining how you have shown that positive feedbacks such as the ice-albedo and water vapor feedbacks are “wizardry”.

  2. James says:

    How very odd. Mr Marshall, we are told, is keen to talk to people who don’t agree with him about climate change. But when these people try to discuss issues with him on his blog, their comments mysteriously disappear.

    • Barry Woods says:

      yep that happened to me aswell.

      comment deleted.

      Of course Marshall is on the record as saying he ‘prefers’ to use denier [than sceptic] as it works..

      at the same meeting Greenpeace media director was talking about making brand ‘sceptic’ toxic..

      he is an intolerant Activist, that created – Deniers – Hall of Shame…

      Maybe people are in denial. put only an a political activist would create a hall of Shame.

      Look up Rising tide, which he founded, and Marshall’s and Mark Lynas article, where they list ‘denier’s

      also worth a read.

      http://www.climate-resistance.org/2012/04/how-to-talk-like-an-oily-dishonest-creep.html

  3. Barry Woods says:

    George Marshall (founder of Rising Tide)

    links to the Rising Tide – Hall of Shame on his website

    to quote:
    All of the deniers- we refuse to grace them with their chosen name, “skeptics”- are dangerous for they create a false debate around the existence of climate change and divert attention from the real debate: “What are we going to do about climate change?”.

    AND

    “Look at the word “sceptic”. It’s a very carefully chosen word.

    - I rather use “denier” – and I’m delighted to say it works.” Marshall
    (ex Greenpeace aswell)
    http://www.joabbess.com/2010/04/17/sceptic-backlash-questions-answered/

    George doesn’t want to communicate with people that disagree with him, he wants to shut them out of any debate.

    Same meeting – Greenpeace media director (panel alongside George)

    “We have to make “brand sceptic” toxic.” – Greenpeace, Ben Stewart

    http://www.joabbess.com/2010/04/15/ben-stewart-greenpeace-stalking/

    I have asked George if he could persuade the Campaign Against Climate Change e is part of the Advisory Group)) to think again about their Deniers Halls of Shame..
    http://www.campaigncc.org/whoweare
    http://www.campaigncc.org/climate_change/sceptics/hall_of_shame

    but he deleted that comment.

    Mark Lynas, stepped down form the Campaign Against Climate Change. Mark told me a while back that the Hall of Shame was shameful

    Tier is a toxic debate around climate change, George Marshall did much to create it.

  4. Barry Woods says:

    James – and here