A few weeks ago, I gave up plastic bottles in favor of recyclable aluminum ones, and wrote about it, pleased that I am taking the environment more seriously than just grumping about it on the blog.
Several environmentally-minded friends urged me to do this and praised me for it.
I was patting myself on the back for my heightening sensibility.
A local theater company has started selling the aluminum bottles rather than plastic ones. It didn’t seem controversial to me.
But this is social media in America in 2019, and it turns out that my decision was not only misguided but stupid. I seem to be a weak-minded consumer addict falling prey to every new product in the market.
(This will stun my bookkeeper, as well as my bank).
I got into a back and forth with a blog reader named Nancy, who did not think highly of me or my aluminum bottles.
The exchange went the usual social media way – downhill quickly, disrespectful, nasty. It also drew a very thoughtful reply about social media from a reader named George Lee. I thank you for it, George, it inspired me once more to think about the ethics of messaging, a powerful new way that so many of us communicate now.
I’ve been writing about how we communicate online for some time – I was a media critic, after all, and a media professor – but in recent months, I think I’m getting somewhere, I am zeroing in on the idea of socially responsible messaging.
The idea of socially responsible messaging appeals to me. I can do better in my own messaging, and so can some of my readers.
For me, the purpose of ethical messaging is to communicate, not conquer, to connect, not ridicule, to educate, not attack, to provoke thought. It is not to ridicule or show contempt for people and their ideas.
More than anything in my lifetime, social media has taught us to hate the other; the people who differ from us are not just wrong; they are evil and dangerous, or worse.
Attack messages, another gift from the Corporate Nation, have never accomplished a single thing I know of except to drive many people underground when it comes to speaking in public.
It’s so easy to argue on these new messaging systems, but the truth is it is a waste of everyone’s time and keeps people from listening to one another.
They are the devil’s gift to the left and right, a way of not communicating to anyone who might disagree or be different from us, the very people we most need to speak with.
I am struggling to figure out how to deal with the climate crisis on a personal level. I was hoping to have a conversation about it. The aluminum bottles were a start; I admit to being confused about how I can help.
Nancy’s third message to me, nastier than the first two, came after I said her tone was arrogant and counter-productive. She didn’t reflect too much on the idea (yes, I was snarky also).
Jon: My tone was fine; yours is not. Frankly, I don’t need to know any details of your life–the issue isn’t whether you need purchased water, or whether you like purchased water. The issue is whether or not buying water in aluminum bottles from Amazon results in a positive good for the environment. It doesn’t, and no amount of your sputtering and protesting will make it so. As an aside, you’re the sort of person that marketers love: you seem to fall prey to every hot new product that’s out there, from Quip toothbrushes to new iPhones to Apple credit cards. You can’t wait to rush to order things that you read about and then tell everyone on your blog how life-changing those products are. It would be much better for the environment if you tried buying locally and eschewed ordering over the Internet. Good luck in your environmental journey!
(I’m happy she doesn’t want to know any details of my life, protest, sputter.)
George responded to the exchange in this way:
“While I do not read you frequently, I follow your blog enough to know that your example is the kind that is so important in our world. Reflecting on personal choices and searches for connections is crucial in developing a sense of social responsibility and so important in this era of exaggerated polarization. It saddens me that some people read your blog only to nitpick. But then isn’t feeling superior, in some way or other, one of the significant distractions that are promoted by our corporate-dominated culture? That way, we are enmeshed in seeing the flaws in others rather than seeking a community to address the many ways that our society falls short in supporting and caring for each other.”
I thought George’s message was profound, and right on the mark. I told Nancy that I didn’t need to be right, just sincere, and if I make mistakes along the way, it is my job to figure that out and correct them. I am deeply involved in ways we can support and care for one another; this is the point of my work at the Mansion or Bishop Maginn High School.
I love my aluminum bottles, they fit my life and needs in many ways, and it is good that they are recyclable, even if they are not the ultimate answer to the climate crisis or even a significant step towards easing it. I mostly want to know when I see those photos of choking whales and dolphins and seals and desecrated beaches that they are not dying from my plastic bottles. It’s a good start.
One step at a time for me.
I don’t know how Nancy knows so much about my personal marketing choices. What she buys or doesn’t buy is not my business.
I would have loved to have a conversation with her about how I might be more effective in helping Mother Earth, but telling me who I am and what I buy and how weak and dumb and muddled I am isn’t the best way to get through to me, or the many millions who need to be persuaded.
I tried to tell Nancy that, but she just got more offensive.
I do like new things and gadgets for sure; Nancy forgets to mention my iPhone 11, which I love most of all my gadgets (it took the photo above). My dentist loves my Quip electric brush, and so do my teeth.
I can’t say enough about my Apple Card, which lets me check out of the supermarket in about two seconds.
But I don’t have the money to buy too many things, and I consider them carefully, which she could have found out by asking. We don’t ask much on social media messages: we tell.
I am actually a marketer’s nightmare in 2020, I am old and don’t have many years of real buying power, on a limited income and getting cheaper by the week. I suspect she’s closer to what they want.
So what did she, someone who cares about the environment, actually accomplish in this exchange? And what did I? Nothing, unless I count getting to read George Lee’s especially thoughtful comments.
“That means that those of us ready to deal in some way with this catastrophic issue will be on the receiving end of some of that panic and hostility,” she wrote me this morning.
I think they’re precursors of deep grief rather than political partisanship. I’m inquiring into how I deal with that in myself and others when it comes up because I think it’s ahead for many of us. For me the challenge isn’t to label it one thing or another, but be aware of the grief and fear behind that and how to hold these going forward.”
This is what is unethical to me, the misuse of communications to tear people down rather than lift them, entertain, make human contact, or provoke them into thought.
Future historians will have to muddle over social media messages like mine to figure out our time. Letters seemed so different.
Nancy was more interested in nitpicking than informing, and I have not always been as careful and thoughtful in my replies as I would like to be.
George is wise in thanking that tech corporations like Amazon, Twitter, and Facebook have fostered this culture of messages as a form of combat. These companies claim they want to eliminate hostility online, but it seems they are lying.
Messaging is much more profitable when it is offensive and hostile; it is not about communicating; it is too often about winning, seeking pity, belittling people, and demonizing people who differ or disagree. It is rarely about listening. It is also distracting.
Let the people chew up each other, never mind the people who are oppressing them.
Goerge is right in suggesting there are whole communities of people to love to correct other people; it is a dominant subset of the digital culture. Hostile messaging is a corporate induced device for using communications to promote institutions and to conquer and dominate rather than inform and connect.
Cable media has led the way to this awful turn in the idea of communicating.
And yes, it is unethical in my mind.
Political scientists are beginning to make the case that unethical messaging – okay, I’m creating a new term – is destroying our democracy and common sense of community. A lot of people are making a lot of money promoting discord and devotion, even while they pretend to be avatars of truth.
So I’ve decided to think about every message that I send or reply to. I want to practice ethical messaging.
If it demeans, belittles, distorts, or is written in anger or impulse, I won’t send it. An ethical message has to do its job – touch people, make them think, make them laugh, educate them, help or challenge them in a civil and respectful way.
In so doing, perhaps I can make some more small noise (like the aluminum bottle) and do a tiny bit of good.
In the meantime, perhaps there’s an Ethical Messaging App on the App Store that I can buy (just kidding, Nancy, I’ll probably have to look online.)
beautifully written as usual Jon. I also do the metal bottles for many reasons. The debate of which has more carbon footprint etc. is much more complex with many grey areas, than its wrong or right. Your readers can’t just lambaste you about it unless they are experts and wouldn’t be nice if they educated instead of scolded? Its going to take many efforts and steps to clean up the harm we have done to our environment, it won’t happen in my lifetime. Interesting idea on the grief and fear, I can feel that, when I look at the horrible pictures of sea creatures and much more, just makes me so sad. I do fear for the coming generations, (i also read lots of sci fi, I know what could happen) they won’t have the world we do now.
Love the idea of ethical messaging. I always felt blogs were about sharing. A window into someone else’s reality, their life. This to me broadens the way i see the world and other people. Seeing other ways of living can really affect your perspective. And no, its nothing to criticize. I had a blog for a while, was thinking for me it was kind of a living journal, adding pictures to my remembering. But gave it up for the same reasons you mention, I didn’t need the negativity.
I don’t comment on how people do things unless they ask for readers thoughts. And I still don’t unless I have a really helpful idea that hasn’t already been mentioned. Everyone has an opinion and does things their own way, but its not my business to say. I can say that for me wanting to give advice is a girl thing, and a older person thing. Wanting to help, take care of, make things easier for, prevent making the same mistakes I did. But whos to say my experience reflects the only outcome of a choice? What turned out good or bad for me may be totally different for the other person. and its human nature we have to figure things out ourselves.
My dad was an ad executive, the first season of Mad Men was exactly our life. Even the brick linoleum in the kitchen! Advertising has one aim, to sell you stuff. I think people forget that and buy into the message. But there are certainly plenty of things that are useful, helpful, and not to mention fun. One must think about it, not just jump in and that’s where much of our materialism comes from I think, all that jumping. That’s what really affects the environment…
I love the idea of an ap for ethical messaging. I think (here’s my bit of advice… 🙂 ) you should write it. If it takes off, plenty of $ for all the wonderful help you give others. And believe me, if i had the money my old iphone would be upgraded in a heartbeat! I love the computer age, and glad Ill have another decade to see what they come up with next! Thank you for your blog, you are very brave. Love that puppy, such cuteness!! Cheers
Im glad you seem to be well
Hmm, having read some of the back and forth on this issue, and having a BS in Environmental Science and work in the field, I have to ask. is your well water problematic for contaminants? If not, why not buy a few reusable aluminium water bottles, kept filled in the fridge to take and use as needed over and over again, no waste, no transport footprint other than the first. If there are issues with your well water, can it be corrected? Filters on faucets perhaps? I live in a rural area and also have a well and septic for utilities and understand there can be issues, especially on older systems. Perhaps I missed something as I do not view on FB much.
Thanks Marianna for being civil about an intrusive question. I have health and travel and driving issues (often away from home) that require specially treated water, and I’m afraid the specific reasons are not your concern. We have several reusable aluminum bottles and use them often. I use the smaller ones when I deem it convenient or necessary. I’m well aware of the issues and options. I don’t feel the need to defend or explain my health decisions on FB, to you or anyone. I appreciate your concern for the environment and am content with my aluminum bottles, large and small. Take care.
OK Jon, did not ask about your specific health issues related to water use. At work we are in an old schoolhouse that has well issues and we have to use a bottled water-cooler for potable water. Perhaps if you mentioned about your use of the refillable bottles and use the canned water for travel etc, rather than all day use, you may not have gotten such a backlash; just a thought. I understand as I also travel with my dogs and need to use other means for items that may not be very environmentally friendly. Good luck!
Thanks Marianna..
Jon, Thank you for your very kind words about me. I am touched beyond words. I have strongly admired your attempts to come to a path of understanding , connection, and growth within yourself and your environs. That I may in any way contribute is quite meaningful to me. Your blog gets to the heart of what I see as the existential problem of our day. How do we connect, if we don’t reveal some parts of ourselves? How do we feel compassion for others who do not reveal themselves, and instead behave in ways that are off-putting? It is only through the determination to be open and as honest as we can be that we be meaningfully connected. If our only “connection” is as slogans or bullet points, then we remain mired in our group or individual isolation. Knowledge of another is only a step in building connection. When combined with respect for the humanity and and individuality of others, then there is growing empowerment to identify issues and situations that can be meaningfully addressed.
I admire your support of the people at The Mansion and for local refugee families. I believe I have a personal responsibility to help create conditions that may influence the lives of others for the better. As soon as I write “better” I am open to debate or negativity about my “elitism” in presuming I know what “better” truly is. But that is indeed the point I think you are trying to make. Without openness and communication how do we know what is useful? My time and energy are now diminished, but the importance to me of my concepts are strong. We are primed to scold or preach. Listening is the skill we so desperately need to develop. And, frankly, I don’t know how to listen effectively without putting the effort to reflect on what others say, and seek clarifications if possible. Your blog represents the type of thoughtful reflection and openness that we require to heal as a society.
The elephant in the room for me is how we all are affected by structural considerations that individually we can do little to alter for the betterment of our ourselves or our society. That pesky word “betterment”, again. is where we so easily get led astray. Without local conversations to try to come to grips with what that might mean for the more diverse interests that make up our community, I am unsure of a path forward to address what I call the issue of social responsibility. This responsibility faces us as a community, a nation , and ultimately as a world. It is the marginalized, or unseen and easily ignored, members of our community who most need a voice. As long as we are encouraged by our corporate and political culture to divide the community into contributors and takers, we will all remain the poorer. You need no encouragement from me; still once more I want to thank you for sharing your journey.
George you are a gift, I really love your posts and the kind and empathetic intellect behind them. We need you here, I sure do, and I hope you will give us the benefit of your insights regularly…I really loved reading your posts..You are a rare bird..