Locating Co-Presence: It's in the Journal

Anyone looking for co-presence with the environment can find it in the academic journal Environmental Communication.

After several years of work, "Locating Co-presence in Media Messages about Global Warming," the research paper I wrote with Dr. Michael Salvador, has finally received publication in Environmental Communication.

I last blogged about this paper when the journal accepted it in early 2016. In the meantime, the article appeared in the online version of the journal. However, this publication in Volume 12 Issue 3 of the hard-copy version makes the acceptance feel more real.

As I celebrate the publication, I would like to thank Dr. Salvador for all his work and help on this project. Hopefully, our paper can make a contribution to the ways we analyze and produce environmental communication. The objective always was to improve the relationship people have with the environment. If you would like to access the article, click here.

We can find co-presence with our environment in how we talk and the actions we take, and now, we can find it in Environmental Communication.

Now Presenting: The Search for Alternative Voices

In our attempts to respond to nature's signals, we clearly need the help of new voices, and I recently gave a presentation on how critical rhetoric allows us to identify these alternative perspectives.

Much of my research in environmental communication focuses on rhetoric, especially one approach to rhetorical criticism called critical rhetoric. When I was asked to deliver a presentation for the Humanities Research Forum Series at the University of South Dakota, I brought together several papers in which I had employed critical rhetoric. Below, you can view the Prezi I used to present my presentation aids for the talk:

Critical rhetoric challenges power by deconstructing meaning and identifying and advocating for marginalized voices. That focus makes it particularly useful as environmental communication scholars pursue new ways of articulating the relationship between humans and nature.

The Prezi above addresses several key aspects of the presentation I gave on critical rhetoric's potential. First, it explains the value of laying out environmental discourse about the human-nature relationship on a continuum. Part of the continuum addresses discourses found in newspaper coverage of global warming. These discourses include nature-as-out-of reach, nature-as-antagonist, and nature-as-co-present, the latter of which represents an important alternative perspective that challenges its more dominant counterparts. Next, the continuum adds components through an analysis of the Web site, The Featured Creature. Together, the discourses from the newspaper coverage and The Featured Creature provide a fuller picture of the human-nature relationship. 

The presentation also discusses how an analysis of The Nature Conservancy's Liquid Courage Web site suggests that elements of physical distance can be added to a public participation model to enhance research into environmental communication. Liquid Courage demonstrates the value of physical-distance elements in our relationship with nature.

As our environmental issues grow more complex and the urgency to address them increases, critical rhetoric presents us with an important tool in finding the voices that can help us respond to environmental signals.

Publication Celebration

The new year began in a big way for me last week.

A year and a half ago, I blogged about submitting a paper for publication. Following a long process of peer review, I received news on January 4 that the paper has been accepted for publication in the journal, Environmental Communication.

This was huge news. First, the paper will become my first publication. That fact, combined with the hard work that went into it, gave the acceptance letter special meaning. Second, as I blogged about in announcing the submission, the paper makes a contribution to communication theory by providing a way of discovering important discourses about the environment in media.

I am very proud and excited to be published, and I am glad to have the opportunity to help advance our understanding of the environment.

Happy new year, everyone!

Nothing to Next

Every journey might start with a single step, but many steps must follow to ensure the destination is reached.

On December 12, the world took a big first step with the Paris Agreement to address global warming. The agreement represented an important moment, but we have a lot of work ahead to make the most of the accord and expand on its success.

First, the agreement can become a turning point for our planet. After all, the collective decision is historic, bringing together the entire world to address our biggest issue. It's much better than the nothing we had before. Additionally, if the agreement is followed up with meaningful action, it can mark the end of fossil fuels and the full adoption of renewable energy.

On the other hand, the Paris Agreement doesn't contain any binding standards. Also, each country will have to lay out plans to make the agreement reality. Put another way, we have a lot of work to do. The Paris Agreement is big, but it is what we do next that will determine our success.

A first step has been taken on global warming, and we have a long journey ahead before we get where we're going, so let's keep walking.

The Maturity of Optimism

The environmental and political worlds are aflutter over the optimism of Washington state.

Although it's usually associated with children, fantasy, and naïve behavior, optimism is what allows us to grow. It brings with it the confidence to face major challenges, seek new ways of thinking, and do what is said to be impossible.

On the other hand, it takes no real effort or talent to find reasons something cannot be done, especially when faced with difficult, complex issues. We've heard "can't" so many times on environmental issues that you'd think it were the name of some species or chemical compound. The combination of pessimism and cynicism that breeds (or yields) "can't" poisons our collective decision-making processes and clouds our lives. It certainly isn't inspirational, and it isn't productive either, meaning it's neither youthful nor mature.

This week, Governor Jay Inslee showed the possibility and productivity of optimism by proposing the Carbon Pollution Accountability Act, a cap-and-trade system that would make Washington the world leader in limiting carbon pollution, address costs for low-income families, contribute to public education, and provide funding for transit infrastructure that would reduce the need for cars. Simply put, it is the smartest, most exciting thing I've seen come to the political side of environmental issues. For a full recap and breakdown of Governor Inslee's proposed program, check out this article from the Sightline Institute.

The best part of knowing your limits is waving as you leave them behind.

Adding a Voice

Some things are so exciting that they need to be said out loud.

I'm celebrating the submission of a paper I co-authored to a scholarly journal. Last weekend, my co-author and I put the finishing touches on the paper, which discusses how critical rhetoric can be used to analyze news media messages about the environment. The paper represents a potential contribution to communication theory. It is also important to me personally because it would be my first published article if it is accepted. As a result, I thought I would commemorate the submission with a video discussing the paper. Watch it below:



It's a wonderful feeling to contribute to the discussion of environmental communication with a paper that provides ways of identifying voices often ignored in conversations about the environment.

It's Always Sunny in Washington State

If you wanted to put solar panels on a house, would you go to Arizona or Washington state to do it? The answer is Washington, of course.

We find the reasons for this answer not in the two states' natural environments but in their political climates. As this news article reports, last November, a regulatory agency in Arizona approved a proposal to charge people monthly fees for installing solar panels on their roofs. This meant that anyone who installed solar panels after the policy was put in place would have to pay $4.90 per month just to have the panels. This week, the Washington state legislature rejected a similar idea, according to this report.

To understand why people would be charged for having solar panels and why Arizona and Washington have taken different stances on the issue, let's look at two current trends. First, solar panels have become quite cheap compared to their prices when they were first introduced and relative to traditional forms of energy like fossil fuels. With this decrease in price comes greater availability. In fact, as discussed here, Best Buy now sells solar panels. 

The greater availability and lower prices of solar panels have made them a true threat to traditional energy providers. With the panels, people can make their own energy and no longer have to get it from utilities. The energy industry sees what this means for its profits and is using proposals for monthly fees like those approved in Arizona to fight back.

A second trend explains why Washington chose a different path than Arizona. Conservative politicians have adopted a stance that supports traditional industries and fossil fuels and have thrown up roadblocks to alternative energy sources. (Note in the article about Washington state's legislature that the proposed bill resulted from a collaboration between conservative lawmakers and the energy industry.) The monthly fees on solar panel ownership are an attempt to make getting solar energy harder again and prevent a move away from traditional energy sources. Washington state simply has a less conservative political climate, and that has made all the difference.

Thanks to a government that supports alternative energy and better ways of living within the environment, the future for solar power remains bright in Washington.

First on the Scene

Initial reports suggest a new age has come for journalism.

Through the National Wildlife Federation's Young Reporters for the Environment competition, youth 13-21 years old have an opportunity to contribute to environmental journalism and win awards for doing so. Submission categories include writing, photography, and video.

Each entry must feature a local environmental issue and show its links to global environmentalism. Additionally, the competition emphasizes a search for solutions to environmental problems. The deadline for submitting an entry is March 15. For more information about the competition, click here.

By encouraging young people to participate in environmental journalism and draw connections between local and global concerns, Young Reporters for the Environment lays the groundwork for a new approach to reporting about the environment. We'll need such an approach as we work to respond to growing environmental problems.

And that's the way it will be.

Opening New Doors

We consider necessity the mother of invention, but inspiration shares some of the parenting.

Few species inspire us more than wolves. Their size, intelligence, formidable appearance, and family structure all touch us deeply. They've also inspired fear and hatred, two reactions that have created some seemingly intractable public debates.

Despite the attention disagreements about wolves receive, recent trends suggest that our deep fascination with wolves may move us toward new solutions that foster coexistence. Last September, I blogged about Conservation Northwest's range rider program. That exciting approach to living with wolves has shown great promise in Washington state. Now, NPR reports on other options for coexisting, and the writer uses some innovative ways of telling the story.

The NPR article addresses conflicts over wolves, but it emerges from them with some great ideas. In addition, the report's incorporation of sound, graphics, and interaction with the reader shows the potential of innovations in journalism. The extra features provide a deeper connection with wolves, the world they inhabit, and the debate around them.

I can't think of anything more inspiring than a strong relationship with the environment.

See Change

Experience the difference.

Global warming is, by definition, a planetary issue. However, sometimes, big problems are better understood on the individual level.

A Web site called iSeeChange is producing reports of global warming through crowdsourcing, using the public to generate the content. Under this model, individuals can share the changes they are seeing as a result of global warming and contribute to the broader picture of the phenomenon. To learn more about how it works and see the reports that have been generated so far, click here.

A changing planet requires changing how we communicate the developments we see, and iSeeChange gives us one tool for doing that.

Inside the Void

Nature abhors a media vacuum.

Traditional news media outlets appear ready to abandon environmental reporting. As I explained in an earlier post, despite 2012 being the hottest year on record in the United States, news media coverage of global warming decreased. That post also mentioned the decision by The New York Times to drop its division for environmental reporting.

Different new media have moved in to fill the void. One of those groups, InsideClimate News, provides reporting on energy issues and climate change.

News sources like InsideClimate News have more importance than ever because the media vacuum on environmental issues would be deafening without them.

Hitting 400

Hitting .400 in baseball is cause for celebration, but when it comes to carbon in the atmosphere, hitting 400 parts per million (ppm) signals problems in our relationship with the environment.

As this news article reports, on May 9, we reached 400 ppm for the first time in human history.

Baseball's .400 is significant because of its rarity. In fact, no Major League Baseball player has hit .400 in 72 years. By comparison, the planet has not hit 400 ppm in about four million years.

Human activity continues to release tons of carbon into the atmosphere, and that carbon makes the planet warmer. One way or the other, our relationship with the environment will change. Either we make the alterations necessary stop our carbon emissions, or we prepare for a much hotter existence filled with growing weather and health challenges.

More with Less

I suspect it's hard to find many journalists in kitchens: They apparently have an aversion to heat.

Within the last ten days, a series a disturbing reports have surfaced around environmental issues. First, as The New York Times reports, 2012 was the hottest year on record in the United States. Then, came the news that on a global scale, 2012 was one of the 10 hottest years ever. Together, these pieces of news suggest things are getting pretty warm in here. 

Now, we're learning how media are responding to the warming of the planet. Huffington Post explains that despite the hot temperatures, coverage of global warming declined in 2012. Also, we learn from Al Gore that The New York Times is disbanding its division that reports on environmental issues.

I find it astonishing and discouraging that news media are growing increasingly silent on the environment as massive environmental changes reshape this planet so alarmingly.

Hot Talk

The election season is heating up, and the weather has been scorching all year, so it is strange that our elected officials seem so cold to the idea of talking about global warming.

News about record heat and heat-related disasters continues to mount. Last week, MSNBC reported that as of the end of August, 2012 is the hottest year in the history of the United States. Today, USA Today published an article saying this summer was the third warmest summer on record in world history. Then, there is the following video, which shows the record amount of ice melting that occurred in the Arctic this year:



Additionally, in my corner of the world, the Pacific Northwest is beginning to experience the kind of drought conditions that have occurred across the country. Washington state and Oregon are both fighting many forest fires, and I spent last week breathing the smoke from those fires.

Despite all these events, global warming doesn't seem to be a very hot topic of discussion among politicians. In response, I would like to encourage everyone to contact their elected representatives and ask them to talk about global warming and how we should address it.

Finnish VP

I'll end this series of entries on my Finland trip with a news story that is actually about the United States. However, since I saw the story in Finland and it probably received as much attention there as it did in the US, it still counts as part of my Finnish experience.

The news is that the US Green Party's vice presidential nominee will be a Finnish-American woman. Born into poverty in Minnesota, Cheri Honkala is an advocate for poor people's rights (she and Green Party presidential nominee Dr. Jill Stein were just arrested for protesting housing foreclosures).

Honkala's ancestors immigrated to the US from Finland. You can read an English-language version of the news article about her nomination on Finnish news outlet Yle's Web site by clicking here.

As a fellow Finnish-American and an environmentalist, I find the news exciting.

Black Day

Today's news from Ohio disgusts me. As a quick summary, law enforcement agents in Ohio have killed at least 25 48 exotic animals that were kept as pets and then released by their owner.

The event and the system that has allowed this to happen make me sick. I condemn those individuals who selfishly try to own animals that should be left wild; a legal system that has not bothered to check this selfishness; anyone who makes money by selling exotic species; the law enforcement agents for whom the use of lethal force seems to be becoming the first and only reaction to so many things; and the society's general lack of concern for animal welfare.

An unhealthy culture indeed.

I Don't Know What Else to Say

I mentioned yesterday that Barack Obama has pulled his own EPA's proposed smog regulations.

This is an inexcusable, cowardly move, and here's a great explanation of why:



Matt Damon for president in 2012.

The Line it is Drawn

Today concluded two weeks of White House protests (I blogged about them last week), which were organized to oppose the proposed Keystone XL Tar Sands Pipeline.

A total of 1,252 people were arrested (many more attended) in peaceful protests over the two weeks, and I would like to thank those individuals and say I support them with pride. Yesterday's decision by President Barack Obama to withdraw the Environmental Protection Agency's proposal for tighter smog regulation reemphasized the importance of the protest and the degree to which the president has set environmental issues to the side.

For information about Tar Sands Action, a group that has helped orchestrate the pipeline protests, click here.

You can watch a short video of the protests below:

Jarring Experience

A Seattle coyote is free from a mayonnaise jar after two men helped remove the jar from its head.

Way to go, Roel Garcia and Jeff Bryant. Thanks for caring.

Watch this great story below. Along with providing a piece of good news, it gives a reminder of the afterlife trash can have after we are done with it. It's another reason why reduce is the most important of the three Rs.

Ideas from Finland

I couldn't continue to use the envirofinn title for this blog if I didn't mention the following story.

Finland's capital city, Helsinki, is developing some new ideas about how to live in the environment.



I think what strikes me most is how the Finns have accounted for and responded to their environment instead of trying to override or conquer it. Another key element is their ability to maximize the use of energy, tapping into the entire cycle and turning the byproducts into additional resources.

Overall, the message is not that this is only feasible because of Helsinki's particular situation; rather, it's a lesson in looking around one's own situation, determining what is possible given the constraints, and committing to the best system for both people and their environment. That's sustainability.