Time to tune in to the real world

VIEWPOINT Joanna Benn

People are more interested in reality TV than the real world, says Joanna Benn. In this week's Green Room, she argues that environmental groups find it hard to compete for attention in a celeb-obsessed age.

Why is it hard to get the message across to a wider audience?

As a communications manager for WWF, it astounds me how hard it is to explain environmental issues. We're either accused of being scaremongers or boring people to death. Why is there no middle ground?

Now, I know it is not possible to please all the people all of the time, but surely everyone should have an interest in the well-being of our environment.

After all, it gives us air to breath, food to eat, freshwater to drink; it even affects our ability to make babies.

And these are just the areas that are relevant for the average man or woman in the street.

The more self-consciously "green" and "socially aware" among us cannot even buy a bar of chocolate or a cup of coffee without endlessly pondering the effects of chemicals used to grow ingredients, or the impact on local communities that harvest the beans.

Getting a grip

So why is it hard to get the message across to a wider audience?

Is it that there's too much bad stuff going on and actually it's easier to switch off and watch Big Brother than think about the rate of extinction?

Species are disappearing at an alarming rate, says Joanna Benn

In case you don't know, the current rate of species extinction is at least 100-1,000 times higher than the expected natural rate.

Still reading? Or are you toying with the idea of clicking on an entertainment story yet?

How about this? In the time is takes you to read this article, one of our planet's unique species will have become extinct.

Or this: by this time tomorrow, a further 150-200 will have disappeared forever. By this time next year? More than 50,000 species will have been consigned to history.

Yes it is depressing, but it's also true. So, should we just slope off and watch "reality" TV or grab a glossy magazine because it's fun to have a nose around the homes of the rich and beautiful?

Who wants to hear about the worsening state of our planet, day in, day out?

Or should we get to grips with the awful state of our world, get off our backsides and stop ignoring what's really happening?

I really don't think of myself as a rebel leader, yet I can't seem to help ranting at dinner parties about overfishing, depleted resources and the hundreds of thousands of turtles that get caught and often killed on fishing hooks each year - often just as the host wheels out the prawn cocktail.

The pattern is predictable. Most people say "that's terrible, awful, scandalous", and notably "I didn't know about that, why aren't people publicising this?"

This makes me feel wholly inadequate because it's my job to communicate environmental issues.

So, why don't we know what's going on in the world?

Here are some of my theories:

• When you browse a website or pick up a newspaper with a catastrophe environmental headline, are you just looking to be educated about the issue? Knowledge is a great thing - but if we don't offer practical easy solutions, my feeling is that most people just switch off.
• Environmental policy can be confusing and complicated. And that makes telling the real story and what needs to happen in today's soundbite age very difficult. Often there are no easy pat answers.
• There is a bias in the stories that do get picked up because news values dictate what's "interesting" to the reader rather than what environmentalists may see as the current priority.
• People don't like ongoing bad news, that's obvious. Who wants to hear about the worsening state of our planet, day in, day out?
• Environmental groups have to safeguard their scientific credibility and relationships with governments and communities, often in carefully couched language. It's valid and understandable, but can mean organisations are forced to hide behind jargon or institutional wording that means little to the outside world.

People who work on environmental issues often fall into two camps. In the first camp are those who think everything they work on is fascinating - but who can really make plant databases, fish stocks or carbon trading interesting all the time?

Is it time to make a song and a dance about environmental issues?

In the other camp are the people who work on exciting issues but don't realise it.

Here is a recent example: "I have a meeting about Prunus Africana", said one member of our delegation at a recent wildlife trade meeting.

Now, perhaps I would've sat up and taken more notice if he'd have said: "I have a meeting about an amazing tree. It's found in Africa and is used to treat chest pain, malaria and fevers. Mostly it's traded on the international market for products used to treat enlarged prostate glands."

Apparently, prostate enlargement affects more than 50% of men over the age of 50.

Perhaps by making our environment and its future more relevant to our everyday lives, we'll start having heated conservations in the Big Brother household about who's left the tap on, where to buy organic produce and what we can do to stop the destruction of our planet - rather than just about who's sleeping with whom.

Joanna Benn is communications manager for WWF International's species programme

The Green Room is a series of opinion pieces on environmental topics running weekly on the BBC News website

---

Do you agree with Joanna Benn? Are we more interested in reality TV than the real world? Is there too much doom and gloom when it comes to the state of the environment? What can be done to make people sit up and take notice of the threats facing the planet?

The state of the evironmment is important for the well-being of the planet and our happiness. Right now things are out of balance because human society is geared towards generating wealth as opposed to generating balance/happiness. If each of us subtly shifts in our approach to life, i.e. think more about our state of being as opposed to material status/how much we get, we will find that not only are we happier, but the environment will be helped by the resulting overall release of pressure on production. By state of being, I mean look closely at our attitudes and think about where they actually come from, and whether or not they really serve our best interests in all aspects of life.
Liz, Woking

Dear Joanna, I believe most people don't care, simple as that. Ross/.
Ross Bellette, Christchurch, New Zealand

In 100 years from now, we will all be dead, including me, including you. Of course there will still be people, but not us. That why most people care about what will be in 10 years, but not in 100.
Pierre Charland, Montreal, Canada

It seems that science is now run by consensus of opinion but the majority of scientists in the US are NOT in agreement as to the true cause of the current warming trend and have urged caution about the green press and political agenda being pushed on the public. I do not watch much TV and I don't know anyone who watches reality shows but I do read a lot of science books, magazines and science web pages and I just do not see any consensus at all. What I do know is that the earth normal temperature for most of it's existance is higher than present and sooner or later it will return to normal. No surprise here. Get over it and plan for a warmer future.
Ed Pardo, Forrest Lake, Pennsylvania, USA

i'm quite sick and tired of hearing "global warming" to be honest, "over population" i think is the main culprit. there shouldn't be shortage of anything if there is not too many of us around. i want to shoot someone who's clamouring about the issue down my throat while having more than two children. i'm not saying one shouldn't have children but please no more than two. something has to give .. to save this planet.
shirley leung, hong kong

Why do people assume that green living is expensive? Think about it peeps. You are buying less of a more expensive but better (more nutritious or longer lasting) product. That is actually cheaper in the long run! And when you start growing or making it yourself it is cheaper still. And with so many money saving opportunities you may not need to work all hours to earn the money to feed your buying and consumption habits. How to do it is all on the It's Not Easy Being Green forum!
Mark, Salisbury

To everyone who complains that nobody knows what to do about things like climate change and species disappearing, etc., it's actually pretty easy to do something. Start by cutting down how much electricity you use - most of it comes from coal fired power stations. Where possible, take public transport, don't drive. Recycle your trash as much as possible. Eat less meat and fish, and substitute vegetables and fruit. See? It's easy. And you save money. Which goes to another compaint: it costs too much to be green. Rubbish, it's actually cheaper to be green. And to those who say that species disappearing is a non-issue, that the environment will carry regardless of what we do: that's true, but the question is, we will be able to survive in the new ecosystem that we unwittingly create?
Ryan , Hong Kong

The complexity of the evidence for climate change is hard for most to grasp. I personally have been concerned about climate change for years having read masses of scientific material on the subject. Humans have taken ownership of this planet and are going to continue exploiting it. I have seen the world population double in the last 44 years I really dont think people want to change. It just means more and more people will be exploiting mother earth untill she has nothing left to give. Enforce strict population control?
Neil Smith, Kyle of Lochalsh

I think I would comment how "interesting" what was said at the dinner table while trying to figure out how to switch seats. I've been hearing about the environment since playschool. I've done the 3 R's from childhood. I've been conscience as far as budget will allow. But my interest in the environment has crashed. I've heard for my entire life and I've take action. How much more of this do I have to listen to?
Emily, Toronto Canada

I find it amazing that so many people here are saying they don't know what to do, or they need guidance and easy solutions to help the environment. Well... they are everywhere!! you can't pick up a paper or look at a billboard these days without being told to recycle, turn it off, buy this, buy that. It really is the small things that will make a difference, and I for one lead a relatively low carbon lifestyle, and am not inconvenienced in the slightest. Open your eyes people, look on the internet, newspaper, journal, and STOP watching Big Brother!! which by the way is absolute c**p, and i will never watch it.
Alex, London

I find it wonderful that people who are unqualified to comment and who have done no research into the topic feel that their sofa-bred opinions can outweigh the word of a senior member of WWF whose job it is to know the facts, and respected researchers in biodiversity and ecology. The estimated rate of species extinction is 1,000 times greater now than it was in prehuman times. Between 0.01 and 0.1 percent of all species are estimated go extinct each year. If the low estimate of species numbers hold (2 million) then that is between 200 and 2,000 extinctions per year. If the upper estimate of species numbers holds (100 million), then between 10,000 and 100,000 species go extinct per year. So 50,000 per year is a good consensus value. I got these figures from web searches for "estimated number of species" and "species extinction rate". I also know who Ernst Mayr and E O Wilson are.
Daen de Leon, Copenhagen, Denmark

Good to Happen takes "TIME"Most Human are "CONCERNED" about the Petty. Show Concern Only when they are "VICTIMS/AFFECTED". The Effective Method is to be Found Out to Reach the Human Concern about the Environments, not mere giving Statistics about the Vanishing species.
Mohan.Dudani, Andover.MA.USA.

I find it really hard to understand why so many people have such little care about what is happening to our planet. How can anyone not find the fact that we are destroying this amazing place and it's inhabitants utterly devastating?! It seems true that in a lot of cases people care more about which celebrity is wearing what than what is happening to our world. Often I come across people that don't care one bit about the world we live in unless it directly affects them personally - I find this totally horrifying. We should all be doing our bit. We have been trusted with such a wonderful world full of wonder and miracles. For Goodness sake lets take care of it!
Jeanette, North Devon

Joanna is right, I did not finish reading her article because the endless doomsaying gave me alert fatigue. The green groups shoot themselves in the foot by preaching nothing but doom and unavoidable, catastrophic disaster about which nothing can be done. I'm very aware of the environment and always have been, but it makes me question everything they say or tune it out completely.
Jeremy Mason, Houston, Texas, USA

I just want to point out that the figure of 50,000 species extinct in a year is not at all ludicrous. It just seems inflated because most people are unaware of simply how huge the number of species on earth are. When most people think of a species they think of a mammal or maybe a fish, these make up just a couple of percent of the species on earth. The vast majority of species on earth are invertebrates too small for the human eye to see. As they make up the bulk of life on earth they are vital to ecosystem functioning, and yet they are not what people worry about when they think of a species going extinct. All the mammals in the world could go extinct and it would hardly cause a blip by ecological standards, but if all the insects went extinct ecosystems would collapse. So when a figure of 50,000 species going extinct in a year is quoted, it is not an exageration, it is that your average person cannot conceive of the scale of diversity on earth. And this goes back to somet! hing previously pointed out, that the level of basic scientific understanding of the general public is too poor for many debates to be conducted in the media.
Mike, Glasgow

I think there are not excuses, everybody should care about our environment (unless stupidity comes first). In the age of the Internet you can go yourself to fish for information now waiting for the BIG media to give it to you the right way. You can understand yourself what you can do to reduce the damage VERY EASILY. Here some suggestion everybody should already know: 1. Change your house light bulbs to reduce energy consumption. 2. Use less your car if you can or opt for Hybrids cars or environmental friendly cars. 3. Reduce paper wasting as much as you can. 4. Reduce any other extra consumption you can. It's so simple! And you don't have to be rich to accomplish that or modify your life SO MUCH, be just a little smart like any human being should be.
Fabrizio Ferrari, Laguna Niguel, CA (US)

EnviroMENTALISTs just like complaining. Just look at the large industrial Wind turbines, they sound like a great idea to your everage person - free energy! But no, not to enviro's who say "ooo but what about the birds". Mini wind turbines or solar panels for your average small house are totaly impractical, as they won't actually pay for themselves with the savings, before they reach their expected end of life! There's also a whole lot of incorrect "facts" spouted out about global warming, with contradictory reports & made up figures - even from "respectible" web sites. No one knows what to believe anymore, so people just switch off. Until these people start coming up with PRACTICAL, CHEAP solutions, they are just blowing out hot air and adding to the green house effect!
Ricky , Reading

One thing large companies learnt long ago is that you shouldn't market all of your products all of the time. An inevitable problem with caring about something as broad and varied as 'the environment' is that there are too many issues all vying for attention. More prioritisation and coordination amongst environmental groups might be one solution. Having said that, Ms Benn is quite tough on herself. Working on environmental issues at European level here in Brussels I am often impressed by the level of public understanding (or at least recognition) of some issues in the UK. Aviation and climate change being one example. In many European countries, not to mention the United States - the debate is several years behind or in the latter example, non-existent. Dudley Curtis Communications Manager Transport and Environment, Brussels
Dudley Curtis, Brussels, Belgium

Gosh! I've never seen so many excuses on BOTH sides of an argument! Since I do not believe that EITHER side is well informed or in possession of "the Truth", I use basic common sense. If it's toxic, it's probably bad for the environment; and since everything I need to live comes from the environment, what's bad for the environment is bad for me. So I need to find alternatives to using or creating poisons. Sometimes that means writing letters. Sometimes it means reading labels and choosing different products. And sometimes it means changing my lifestyle. But BLAME isn't going to solve the issue on EITHER side.
Morgaine, Sparta, NC

People like Joanna really irritate me. I'm doing my bit - I cycle to work, I recycle as much as I can, I buy Fairtrade &/or Organic whenever possible. I know the environment is in trouble, so I don't need her telling me. If people like her used all their excess energy actually doing something about the environment instead of going to dinner parties and ranting at other people, the world be much greener.
Eliot, Hove

Everyone seems to be missing one fundemental point. Despite (or even perhaps in spite of) our so-called intellingence, we are just animals, and the fact of the matter is that the majority of humand-kind take as much notice of the environment as the rest of the animals do. Less, in some cases probably ! And does it really matter if some species (including ourselves) become extinct - something else will take over, perhaps even something more intelligent than our species !!
Mike Gill, scarborough, uk

it is unbelievable that people still claim to not know what to do about the most well known environmental issues of our time! For God's sake...turn off the standby, turn off the lights, turn down the heating 2degrees, don't over-cool your office in summer, drive less and eat less meat, don't buy veggies and fruits from foreign countries esp when they are also growing where you are....it's a no brainer..if everyone would just stop making excuses and do it!
melanie , vienna austria

The heartening aspect of this forum is that there are so many people who are aware of the environmental emergency we are bringing about. Most of us CAN alter our lifestyles significantly and CAN put the word out. One step at a time. Saying were doomed (which may be true) doesn't help. Putting some extra insulation in and turning down your thermostat does... As to those who say there isn't a problem..please, the overwhelming majority of scientific evidence, research and theory is against you. To think otherwise is contrary to all reason.
Stephen Burt, Portland, ME

Rightly or wrongly, most of us live in a capitalist society, where buying and selling is something to be pursued with vigour. Unfortunately, this translates into unecessary consumption and disposal. Therfore, our societal arrangements are somewhat at odds with our environmental aspirations. I'm not an anti-capitalist, I'm just saying that the two are incompatible and until that is realised and addressed, attempts to get the public on board are bound to meet with apathy. On an individual level, people are and always have been selfish. If you want them to act, try making it personal. We're not talking about damaging the planet (that will go on long after we have evicted ourselves), we are talking about making it uninhabitable for humans. Most people won't care that a tree or a species of animal has become extinct, because they can't translate that extinction into anything that will affect them directly.
Dermott, England

Most people will need help and a strong lead to face reality and stop damaging the environment. Human activity is having an increasingly severe impact on the planet, but a small proportion of people could start the change to energy saving and renewable technologies. First we should get the facts about energy and the environment from scientific organisations such as the Royal Society. Secondly we should reduce energy use where practicable. Thirdly we should support innovative British energy industries, not just the global organisations which have been favoured by the Government.
Jean Aldous, Bury St Edmunds, UK

The problem with most environmentalists is that they are middle class/upper with plenty of time on their hands and unfortunately the only people they hurt are ordinary working class people who enjoy taking well earnt breaks. Any flight taxes etc will only affect the working class not those rich enough not to care. As for developing nations such as India, Brazil etc how can we berate them for pursuing the wealth that we have and bombard them with every day on their tv screens?Hypocrisy and western liberalism at its worst trying to impose our way of life on other societies as if we are better. Offer alternatives and they may change, offer nothing except threats and condemnation then you'll get nothing.
Steve, Lincoln,UK

Perhaps the reason so many people ignore real life and real issues, and instead concentrate on the trivial, is the same reason why so many still turn to religion: it shifts responsibility to a higher power (a god or a government) and because it's comforting to ignore the truth. As the saying goes, "ignorance is bliss."
David, Cheshire

I work hard to let my kids know about the planet and the damage we do. I also do my best to show them how we can help, changes we can make. My children don't watch reality TV, they love the nature programmes. Maybe one answer is for the reality TV programmes to incorperate Stuff that lets the public know what is happening what they can do and how to do it!
Tracy, Broadstairs

I'm sick of people making excuses for the way society is in the west. Everybody who reads this has to face up to one truth, listen and listen good.....WE'RE TOO LAZY!!!! Fact. We're just not engaged in the world around us. We're engaged in some celeb rubbish or quite willing to moan about environmental issues costing too much (not as much as that 52" LCD TV) is this really such a good life. Depression is at an all time high, along with obesity and everyone seems to moan that we don't have the right work life balance. Well go out and do something about it, and stop being so LAZY!
dave, Leeds

I sympathize entirely with this crusade. I have a green business of my own (selling photo frames and planting trees) and it very difficult to get consumers interested in the eco side of our business. Indeed the chap that does all my technology work thinks I'm mad. Personally, I think most people are so detached and insulated from climate change issues they just don't care. Until something catastrophic happens I believe it will stay that way.
Richard Rhodes, Chiang Mai, Thailand

Did anyone think that Thomas Malthus was correct after all? The problem with the environment is too many people. The world's population just keeps assuming that they are not to blame. More People equates with more land demand resulting in less for wildlife and farming. Living in your little cubical of an apartment does not insure the world more space for the rest of humanity; it only keeps you farther from reality. Wasn't it Buckminster Fuller that once said "Less is More"? In terms of homo sapiens inhabiting this planet, more will mean less for all of us. That's the real reality.
JK, St Paul, MN USA

The problem is that most environmental solutions mean changing what you are doing to more expensive solutions, and most people cannot afford to do that. Whilst anyone can care about the environment, only rich nations can do something about it. Also, the environmental message is too vague and too big - get 10 environmentalists in a room and see what they agree on !! You cannot solve everything immediately, so compromise, agree on a small number of things and start changing those.
Jim, Dursley, UK

To answer John's point, although we don't know exactly how many species there are, there are some well established statistical techniques using sampling which allow you to produce a fairly accurate figure for how many species are dying out. Similar techniques can be used to get good figures for historical rates of species extinctions. Perhaps next time we can get WWF to bore us with the scientific details, including references, except that we will probably just switch over to watching reality TV if they do.
Nigel, Coventry

People need to be given options. I have no clue what I can do to help. I mean I hear about how we are destroying the planet but what are some realistic ways to really make a choice.
Latoya Webb , Madison, WI

I have to say that if the reaction of other guests at the dinner parties Joanna attends is genuinely as she has said then they are not professing interest as such, but merely polite boredom in the hope that she won't go on about the subject much more. Ranting won't improve their feelings on the subject either. That is how it comes across in this piece, so this may have an impact on how the general public also perceive the subject matter. And the example of the African tree, well, that is just not "cutsie" enough for the general public, no matter how it is put across.
Hattie, Glasgow

The beauty of the universe is that reality--that is REALITY, not reality TV--is completely independent of our opinions, beliefs, and thoughts. Reality will continue in it's slow but steady way to move the universe according to its laws. Our actions will have consequences according to the laws of the universe, whether or not we like it, and whether or not we understand it.
Beth, London, Ontario, Canada

I disagree with the sentiment that people don't know what's happening, they know, they just choose to ignore it. People know what the problem is, and everyone will pay some form of lip service to wanting things to improve - but when it comes down to it no one is really willing in inconvenience their own life. If you told 1000 people that it would take ten minutes away from their day to accomplish X task that would benefit the environment/people/animals but have no visible effect on their own little life you'd get maybe a quarter who would do anything about it the rest would make excuses. Everyone wants to talk about moral ideals and look like they care but in the end are too individualistic to actually change for any cause (not just the environment). We'll only start to make changes when it adversely affects our lives, until then it is so very easy to play dumb and watch big brother - after all ignorance is bliss.
Mina, Canada

There are two sorts of people when it comes to environmental issues - those who don't want to know (sadly, 99% of the population), and those who try, but are loosing the battle because the other 99% don't want to give up their gas-guzzling patio heaters and cheap, non-recyclable junk food. There's no solution, especially with rising food and fuel prices forcing everyone to go for the cheap, mass produced options.
Steve Lake, Reading, UK

To John in Melbourne. How proud you must be, sitting on your sofa, sipping a cold one, and rubbishing the findings of scientists who have studied this for years. You're obviously cleverer than any of your friends imagine you are... Do you know how many species there are in the world? Even to the nearest million? Wake up and learn about your environment before you rubbish the statements of others more informed than you.
Andy, Dunfermline, Scotland

I think people are concerned, however most of us are too lazy/selfish to do much about it; i know i am. Also, "The Economy" is all important to politicians; growth in the ecomemy is really a measure how how much more we are trashing the planet. 3% more trashing this month, whohoo!
Jon Foster, Exeter, UK

The one problem I have with all news reports like this is that they only ever mention the "disappearing" species, but you rarely hear about species thought extinct being rediscovered or even whole new species being found (I know there are not as many of these but it does happen) A bit more balanced reporting would be great but of course a headline of "100 new species discovered" doesn't sell as well as "100 species destroyed by Man!!!!!"
Richard, Leeds, ENGLAND

Why all the doom and gloom? We seem to be focussing on the people who don't care about these issues, not realising that in the last couple of decades thousands if not millions of people have altered their lives to live greener, and more environmentally economical (ignoring the fact that many always have, anyway). Television is always going to go for shock, fad and fiscal concerns as these things have proven to be 'popular'. Green issues begin at home, between parents and their children, educating them on the world in which they live. Teachers also have a responsibility. Why should the media have to nanny the world? People must have the education available to them, and then live their lives as they morally see fit. If that means not giving a fudge, then that's their prerogative.
Moriarty, Cardiff

There was a book published a few years ago called Ishmael(no, not the biblical one!), by Daniel Quinn. It is an extraordinary book that captures the imagination, touches the heart and inspires. All qualities missing in much of the words we read on this subject every day. I am now 74 years old and have never forgotten it - it permanently changed the way I look at the environment. I do what I can, as a writer - I write. As an old age pensioner I change my light bulbs, save water, recycle and make compost. Alone, what I do will not save the planet - but these are the simple things that if done collectively by everyone - will make a difference. Most importantly my heart was touched by that book - if your heart is touched then you act from a creative and productive place within you - whatever age you are.So, to start with - switch off Big Brother and READ THE BOOK.
Persephone Arbour, Kimmeridge, Wareham, Dorset UK

This seems very simple to me.......Education of the younger generation. This however must apply to worse environmental offenders...EG China & India If they continue to but growth and economy before everything without any consideration for the rest of the planet then i am afraid it is pointless excerience and forever an up hill struggle.
Jimmy, Southampton

I think people tune out because it seems like the news is always bad, and it's on such a global scale. Species are endangered all over the world -- and apart from donating money, there doesn't seem to be anything I can do about it. If you only give people depressing news, they're going to tune out. The idea about giving specific ideas is good, although again, that only affects local issues, not things like gorillas and rhinos disappearing. How about joining the reality TV craze with a series about conservationists or zoologists? Showing people working in the field, accomplishing something will have a greater chance of getting people involved. Or a competition where the prize is environmentally-action oriented (in a sexy way, of course!)? Don't just bemoan reality TV and give people more bad news -- use the medium to your advantage.
Janet, Rhode Island, USA

THERE IS NO THREAT TO THE PLANET!! Species becoming extinct is NOT a problem. We're not still crying over the dinosaurs' demise are we?! As species die out, new ones EVOLVE and adapt to a changing climate, so it doesn't matter one bit that temperatures are rising. Don't forget the fundamental fact that ALL species are products of their environments, so if earth's temperature quadruples, yes, polar bears may cease to exist, but there will still be a rich array of complex life forms perfectly suited to the 'new' conditions. That's why in very hot places, species like lizards exist, and in cold places, species like polar bears exist, and fish live in water, we live on land etc. etc., it's really quite simple. All this climate change fear mongering is a waste of time and I personally am fed up with these well-meaning but completely deluded sanctimonious fools peddling nonsensical garbage and telling us not to leave lights on or throw plastic away. If you're really that bothered,! don't have kids and contribute to the burgeoning population which is the real cause fo the strain on the earth's resources. The reason people would rather watch tv than listen to your endless tirades of rubbish about the environment is because frankly it's boring.
Ruckspin, UK

Surely anyone who mistakes watching a bunch of self obsessed village idiots as "entertainment" is beond grasping the scope of the current problems?
Lee, Holywell, Wales

I see the problem is that both sides of the issue skew the debate to their point-of-view. You don't get, in my opinion, the truth from either side. You would have to be a blithering idiot to belive that the human race is not impacting the earth and its "other" species in a negative way; conversly, the same can be said for the "true" facts that are provided from the environmental side. I believe the truth lays somewhere in the middle and as a result people tune out to the argument and become apathetic. Sadly, I believe this is what has happened to me!
Rick Crogan, Southport, FL USA

The problem with getting everyone to engage with environmental issues is that the average person will not believe it until they see it. There's plenty of fish in the fish shop, so the fish must be OK. The sea doesn't appear to be outside my window so obviously there's no global warming. Explaining cumulative effects, balance points and inertial forces to these people is like explaining sex to an amoeba, it might sound good, but they don't get it.
Andrew, Reading

50 000 species extinct by this time next year! That is one of the most alarmist piece's of clap trap I've ever heard¿.and I'm a civil servant! You go on to state "Yes it is depressing, but it's also true" where is this evidence to back up your clearly outlandish claims, I am by no means trying to deny the fact that species go extinct and climate change is happening, but if you are going to make exaggerated statements like this please provide some kind of proof. Have you just made up based on one particularly bad day where about 6 species went extinct and though "If this carries on every day for a year it will mean 50 000 species will go extinct I must warn the uneducated masses!" or is there an actual genuine reason to believe that 50 000 species will be dead! If you are going to report this as truth back it up! This type of irresponsible journalism is what is destroying peoples trust in experts and especially the Beeb! Looking forward to seeing your proof!
Martin Macdizzle, Upper Lowerton, Scotland

What is needed is simple, relevant, concrete examples of threats. I came across an excellent instance recently: I had the drainage at the back of my house, which is 120 years old, replaced because it was no longer able to cope. My builder, who had been in the trade for 30 years, commented - without prompting - that, starting about five years ago, such replacements became much more common; the only plausible explanation was changes to the nature of rainfall (more downpours overwhelming the infrastructure). A few examples like that would hit home more powerfully than abstract waffle about climate models.
Alastair Scott, London, United Kingdom

We are doomed. People are brainwashed by TV and other poisons into idiotic selfish sheep without a capacity to see people beyond immediate family and friends as being of any importance/their brothers and sisters. Ditto their inability to see any part of the planet beyond their mortgage deeds or car etc, as being in any way 'thiers' to protect. Were are going what i call 'yeastwards'. Too many, too bad,.... not for much longer. It is going to be very messy and upsetting, but we'll slip/trip/crash out of our current rotten form into another; less powerful, less corrupt, more humble, less numerous(possibly extinct). If it happens it happened because we were no better than to bring it on ourselves. I know there are a very active and increasing minority who are keen and earnest, but the average will, intention and consciousness is so far dulled that I just can't see the ship slowing and turning before it is too late.
Tom, UK

Green this....fair trade that....footprint.....yawn yawn yawn. To be honest, much as I am interested in our environment, I am completely turned of by a seemingly endless procession of eco-fascists preaching to me how I should live my life. In fact they are self defeating, as I just switch off now. And the rank hypocrisy of the eco-movement is breathtaking. On one hand we are told to cut carbon emissions, on the other these same people are against the one power source that could realistically achieve this, nuclear power. I get the impression these people will never be happy until we are all back in caves eating berries.
JG, Scotland

You are right, people are more interested in Big Brother - or are they? A recent episode of Spring Watch out rated Big Brother. Yep, absolutely true! But why? It is not the usual situation. The answer to my mind is earlier in your article: "toying with the idea of clicking on an entertainment story yet?" Beautiful images is one thing, the authority of David Attenborough always counts for something, but silly - now that will always get attention. Big Brother and I'm a Celebrity are silly. Indiana Jones is Silly. Bill Oddie is Silly! See the connection yet? When you watch a hollywood blockbuster no one is trying to make you feel guilty about anything. They are not trying to sell you a political dream. If you say to someone, "Come out to the wilderness, it is amazing fun!" You will get some attention. Add, "And you will help protect the environment too," and you have just lost them all again. People will do things for the silliness of it. They actually don't want to know about whether it has any benefits or not. So, get people involved by offering them the adventure. Have what they are doing help save the environment, but make sure that at no time they ever find that out!
Joss Sanglier, Stony Stratford

From my perspective I do want to know what is going on in the world, but feel helpless to make a difference. Practical advice about what to do would go a long way, such as Amnesty's letter writing. Yes I have energy-saving light-bulbs and switch off electrical items plus I re-use and re-cycle. But what else? Install a wind-turbine? Then what? Does all this really help when industry is wasting so much?
Rachel, Southampton, UK

In a phrase - short-termism, which is a relatively recent but seemingly all-pervading trend in our society. We buy things, only to junk them as old hat and buy some more things. We've lost faith in pension schemes because what we thought was rock-solid turned out to be written on sand; we can't even secure a future by getting on the housing ladder. We're only expected to have the attention-span of a guppy these days (Big Brother, take note)- so something cataclysmic but distant like the destruction of the planet has no chance. It's the dolphins I feel sorry for.
Kate Davies, Exeter

I agree entirely with Joanna, that people waste their lives watching artificially constructed 'reality' when there is so much real life to live. On an environmental level I think the real problem is that there are just too many people in the world using up too many resources. The earth just cannot provide for so many people, without the rest of it's inhabitants suffering. There needs to be a huge lifestyle change from overriding commercialism to living more in harmony with the world. It is up to all of us to play our part, however small.
HM, Notts

Not to offend anyone, but I think one of the biggest problems is credibility. 'Experts' keep telling us we have 10 years to act, but they've been saying it for 30 years or more, it now just smacks of 'crying wolf' and rightly or wrongly people switch off. Likewise when you see the rather misguided protests at Heathrow you see their priorities are completely skewed. If you have limited time to act you don't focus on the small issues, you start at the top and work your way down. For too long transport has seemingly taken the overwhelming majority of the flack at the expense of the biggest causes like power stations and deforestation and this together with 'green taxes' has again, rightly or wrongly given weight to public mistrust and apathy. The environmental movement desperately needs to rethink how it engages the public.
Chris, Peterborough

What if every BBC article that had an environmental impact ended with "Environmental expert "name" recommends ..." with a tip or two? Particularly something simple that many people reading the article could do that day?
Elizabeth, New Hampshire, USA

In my opinion, the human population is way too big. The bigger the population, the more we need to exploit our environment. Nature will find a way to solve this problem sooner or later. It's just a question of how drastic its solution will be.
matthias, reykjavik, Iceland

Here's hoping that Big Brother is next on the extinction list...
Jenny, London

What a lot of nonsense! Scientists don't even know how many species exist on this planet (and continue to find new ones) let alone the expected rate of disappearance. So 50,000 species will supposedly be extinct in the next 12 months. That's more than 500,000 species over ten years or more than 5 million in a century. Do I look stupid enough to believe this? Is it any wonder why the WWF lacks credibility!
John, Melbourne, Australia

I agree with everything Joanna has remarked upon. My main feeling is total frustration reading about the unrelenting destruction of the planet's natural world--total frustration, because there's never a suggestion as to how any one individual might do something to help stop or prevent environmental catastrophes. We're all feeling helpless in the face of seemingly insurmountable planetary problems.
Susan White-Noel, tucson, AZ

It's the fact that articles like this always fail to give me any one practical thing I can do to HELP - and don't say, "donate money" - that turns me off. Helplessness and despair are not feelings that most normal people seek out for kicks. Reality shows draw people in by giving them a vote, making them part of the event, and helping them identify with the people shown - perhaps rather than berate these shows, green campaigners should be learning from them.
Chandra, London

I was always interested in the environment and protecting our planet. That was until the subject became a gravy train and was high jacked by politicians needing votes, scientists after research funds and TV stations looking to boost their ratings with dramatic stories of doom and gloom. The environment has become a new religion that can not be questioned and rather than sensible reasoned debate about the subject we now get "holier than thou" ranting. I for one have become fatigued by the constant stream of so called experts pushing their own band wagon that I've completely lost interest in the subject. Indeed to me the word "environment" has become the most boring in the English language.
Mark, Merseyside, UK

I object to the term reality TV- it is not about reality. Just because it doesn't feature professional actors doesn't mean it isn't entirely artificial. However I do agree with the article. People cannot take the step from continuous bad news about the environment to actively feeling they can do anything about it. It is difficult enough feeling that you can get your own political system to respond to a need like this but when it is,say, Ecuador removing the ban on shark fin products how can you react effectively. So we exercise judgement over what we buy, contribute to relevant campaigning charities and recycle as much as possible. Here is an idea of how to communicate the message. As television is so focussed on the human stories why not pair up stories from, say, someone trying to farm in a Brazilian rain forest with someone on the point of buying a set of teak garden furniture. This might highlight the complexities of trade, choice, farming, population etc. - although try not to present it as too complex or people will switch channels.
Bill Ebdon, Godalming UK

Un-reality TV is far more interesting and easier to understand. Does the environment concern me now? No. Will it? Probably not. So why worry about it. I haven't the time to worry about things i do not fully understand! Surely that's someone else's problem. They get paid, it's their job not mine. Right? Well, i do secretly and i recycle when i can be bothered, so that'll do me for now or until things get worse.
Eyes Wide but Shut, Romford, Essex

Journalists are the problem - everything gets so oversimplified that it's meaningless. Two examples: a story that fewer migratory birds are coming to the UK since where they spend summer doesn't get cold enough to make them leave any more in winter. The article then went straight to worrying about "declining numbers" as if the birds were dying out rather than just not coming here any more. Misleading and alarmist. Second example: birds again, a warm winter had enabled lots more UK nesting birds to survive, and a warm spring made a greater than usual proportion of the chicks survive. So naturally there won't be enough food for them later when all these extra chicks are growing up. But wild creatures always make as many new young as they possibly can, and it's natural that a proportion of them starve, 'cos they always make so many. Headline was "Millions of birds face starvation" as if in not-so-warm years, none of them starve. Again oversimplification makes fact into a scare story and basically meaningless, being without a description of the norm for comparison. Both these examples are from the BBC News web, in the last year or so, from memory.
hugo, cambridge uk

There must be a positive side to the fact that so many people are infatuated with celebrities - if more celebrities started educating the masses, then maybe more people would start to listen. We all have a personal responsibility to this planet, yet many of us seem to think it's someone else's problem. I have a fantasy where I'm really really rich and hire an eco conscious advertising agency to come up with punchy, life-changing slogans and images about our planet and our duty to ourselves to make it stay a wonderful place: they are posted all over huge bill boards, played on prime time tv, and everybody takes notice.
Name withheld, Lewes, East Sussex

We get doom and gloom every day about the worsening state of our society, so why not the environment? And shame on you, BBC, for having Big Brother updates every week and encouraging it!
Sue, Coventry, UK

I couldn't agree more - it is far to easy to switch on the Tv and switch off your brain at the same time. I want the media to challenge me, make me laugh or angry, but most of all to leave me "improved". Comment and education on the stories can do this - whether some "pop star" has got any knickers on or is suing over a hat won't!
Andy Miller, London

I find that the main problem is that a majority of people don't understand science. They don't understand how science works and assume that everything is black and white so when scientists disagree with each other they think it invalidates the science. They don't understand basic scientific concepts so complex stuff has to be simplified so much that it loses most of its impact. The process is not helped by some of the people doing the presenting. The BBC are not blameless. "Dumbing down" happens - just look at the decline and fall of Horizon, which gradually reduced its science content to be replaced by dramatic pictures and melodramatic dialogue. Have a read of New Scientist if you want to know how to write for intelligent people.
Merlin, Cardiff UK

I share your concern, the fate of humanity depends upon the state of the environment... and whilst I really would like to be a humanist - I've met too many people... still - one should try to remain positive and optimistic, since the alternative is to acknowedge just how fecking awful everything is. Dave
David Stevens, Bradford

"So, why don't we know what's going on in the world?" The most important answer to this is that we don't want to know. The truth is that the capitalist death machine (in other words, us) is destroying the world because it pays to do so. Because we are insane, we think foreign holidays/iPods/Big Brother is more important than a functioning biosphere. To quote Derrick Jensen, "Civilization is not redeemable. This culture will not undergo any sort of voluntary transformation to a sane and sustainable way of living. If we do not put a halt to it, civilization will continue to immiserate the vast majority of humans and to degrade the planet until it (civilization, and probably the planet) collapses." The truth of this statement is too painful for most of us to confront so as soon as we catch a glimpse of it, we look away.
Dan,

"So, why don't we know what's going on in the world?" The most important answer to this is that we don't want to know. The truth is that the capitalist death machine (in other words, us) is destroying the world because it pays to do so. Because we are insane, we think foreign holidays/iPods/Big Brother is more important than a functioning biosphere. To quote Derrick Jensen, "Civilization is not redeemable. This culture will not undergo any sort of voluntary transformation to a sane and sustainable way of living. If we do not put a halt to it, civilization will continue to immiserate the vast majority of humans and to degrade the planet until it (civilization, and probably the planet) collapses." The truth of this statement is too painful for most of us to confront so as soon as we catch a glimpse of it, we look away.
Dan,

I completely agree and well done for raising this in the green room. One of the other main issues is that people are by nature not long term thinkers. They can't see how these things will affect them and anyway it is in the future, they will deal with it when they come to that bridge. People don't want to know, they don't want to be unconvinced by something they don't understand and therefore don't care about. However frustrating it is, we need to keep trying, learn from our failures and have the courage to think out of the box.
Abby Jackson, Belfast

In talking of biofuels, I haven't heard anyone on TV say anything about the fact that if the EU press ahead with their quotas for biofuels - this will cause even more suffering for the orang-utans in the pursuit of palm oil and the devastation of their habitat. I was so disappointed in the BBC for putting the programmes on BBC 4, not 1 0r 2, with David Attenborough where he showed the 'gorillas in the mist' the ones that cuddled him years ago and spoke so movingly about how primates and great apes in particular are at risk from man's encroachment. There are things that can be done to help but the media do not seem interested in even putting these things on the screen and it is such a big, important issue. We can help if we all try, even if it's just writing to Governments, supermarkets, etc. to ask them to use only sustainable palm oil, etc. We CAN change things -IF WE WANT TO! That I think is the message - if enough people want change, change happens, we have a great power, collectively to change the Earth for the better. Thanks, Margaret.
Margaret Moscrop, Carlisle, England.

Why is it that we can't have both? Why do you want choice taken away? No one HAS to watch reality TV!!! Society will always have a majority of dullards who don't care less about environmental issues, or whatever the flavour of the week/month/year is.
Ade, Dudley, UK

Whilst I agre with everything that Joanna says, the most trouble she and other commentators have is getting the message to all and sundry. If my nephew is anything to go by, he neither reads a newspaper or looks at any news on the TV, so is probably oblivious to any issue that is in debate, especially 'green' ones. Whilst admirable, environmental issues are not always at the forefront of people's attention, so perhaps a method of getting the message across needs to be publicised, which everyone uses; beer cans, pot noodles, petrol pumps, take-aways food shops etc. If the message is flooded on everything we look at, even if not in the media, maybe some of it will stick.
Clive, Guildford UK

Dear BBC, I have feared for a long time now that cult of celbrity and our seemingly limitless lust for voyerism (matched only by the TV comapnies limitless talent for racking up naff ideas for shows like does your soul have a cold) will beat all other educational attempts on TV. We worship what is unimportant and reject reality. Poeple must be woken up to the state we find our planet in today and how they can help to bring about much needed change. But until the media as a whole stop commishioning reality TV and glorifying the celebs that infest it I think that your everyday veiwer will stick with what they have been conditioned to enjoy. Regards Matt, 26
Matt Elcock, Bournemouth, Dorset, UK

Personally, I don't watch Big Brother. I'm not interested in a bunch of non-entities doing not very much. I'm not interested in the environmental debates either. There's way too much political bias and misleading information being put about. Fact: the world isn't going to end anytime soon, it may just become uninhabitable by humans. Fact: global warming is natural and inevitable, get used to it and plan for it instead of wasting time and resources trying to stop it. I do care, however, about the extinction of animal and plant species, and think that this is something that the WWF, and others, should be shouting about. Maybe the BBC could highlight the issue by a series of documentaries on the subject of what we've already lost and what we're going to lose in the future. Or how about newspaper headlines along the lines of "Another day, another 50 species lost", and list them.
Chris, Derby

Now we have environmental reality TV (and on the BBC). Yes, people are more interested in a bunch of losers/celebrities prancing round on TV. It's part of the modern way on life to believe you can have what you want with no downside or payback. Most people are selfish and wasteful and will not believe that how they live and what they do will harm the planet and other people.
Karen, LONDON, UK

Perhaps people watch Big Brother because it seems more "real" than all the enviro-media. Enviro-media reminds me of news headline escalation: to get people's attention, the news has to be more extreme than before. So what do we get? We get to see even more dire predictions, bigger numbers in statistics, and far more catastrophic consequences if we don't act "right now." What happened to the threat to the rainforests? Did that lose interest? How about acid rain? Anyone remember that? We're on global warming now, and how long will that last? Maybe we're bored, or just annoyed, by all this "environmentalism." At least "Big Brother" or whatever is just there for entertainment.
Chris C., USA

I think that environmental news are mostly depressing stories about animals dying, ancient woods burning and -since recently- temperatures rising. There are hardly any success stories even though with all the effort and money spent on those issues, there must be some positive achievements. Sadly, that is rarely conveyed in the news. People will switch off if there is ever only something negative to report.
Ulika, London

I am concerned about the state of the planet but I am also concerned about a lot of other things that are just as important to me. Just because I do not "rant at my host" (not very polite anyway) doesn't alter the fact. The problem is the solutions presented by the enviromentalists are just not practical i.e. give up your car and use public transport - great if you live in London or are not in a rush but for the rest of us its useless. If the suggestions were simple and practical for all then more would help.
Katharine , Liverpool