Instead, start listening for the term “our deteriorating atmosphere”.
What makes you more likely to conserve energy: being asked to be “energy efficient”, or being reminded about “saving money for a more prosperous future.”?
Do you just hate it when people keep harping about “the environment”? Prepare to hear, then, at lot less about “the environment”, and a lot more about “the air we breathe” and “the water our children drink”.
Someone apparently spilled the beans about new enviro-speak that will likely shepherd a lot more us into supporting the reduction in freedoms that would come with controlling “global warming”. The New York Times reports that:
The problem with global warming, some environmentalists believe, is “global warming.”
The term turns people off, fostering images of shaggy-haired liberals, economic sacrifice and complex scientific disputes, according to extensive polling and focus group sessions conducted by ecoAmerica, a nonprofit environmental marketing and messaging firm in Washington.
Instead of grim warnings about global warming, the firm advises, talk about “our deteriorating atmosphere.” Drop discussions of carbon dioxide and bring up “moving away from the dirty fuels of the past.” Don’t confuse people with cap and trade; use terms like “cap and cash back” or “pollution reduction refund.”
But apparently we weren’t supposed to know yet:
A summary of the group’s latest findings and recommendations was accidentally sent by e-mail to a number of news organizations by someone who sat in this week on a briefing intended for government officials and environmental leaders.
Do you really think we weren’t supposed to know? Or was the “accident” just part of the attempt to get people conditioned to reacting to the new words when they see them in print?