Maybe the axiom by Mark Twain best
explains the mental posture of Laguna Beach city council
promoting the over-priced over-built Village Entrance and
ineffective parking structure in June.
Mark
Twain said “It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into
trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so.”
The
focus of controversy in the city design proposal was to park
580 automobiles in a 4-story parking structure big as a
football field, then hide the entire garage inside a public
park so nobody would notice.
Despite
several years of recommendations made by civic groups, expert
testimony by hired mobility consultants and the overwhelming
majority in public workshops opposed the parking structure ,
the city refused to deviate from it’s original June plan.
Despite the debunking
presented by LetLagunaVote, the city council maintained their
posture to support the $65 million unmodified plan. That begs
the question: do facts actually matter enough to change the
minds of decision-makers?
Researchers are
interested in the science of ‘communicating science’ to decision
makers in order to form better policy and manage issues like
wood smoke, climate change, fracking, acid rain, Evolution,
cigarette smoke and seat-belts. Through experiments researchers
showed there are several mechanisms present which encourage
communication or impede it depending if an ideological
pre-disposition is present. (GRIST “How do you get people to give a
damn about climate change?”)
It might be obvious that
people not polarized by strong ideology are open to
communication of new ideas posed in a consensus message. An effective consensus message might
be “seat-belts reduce auto fatalities by 50%” or “97 out of 100
climate scientists agree global warming is due to greenhouse gas
emissions” or “cigarette smoke causes cancer”. People with a
strong affinity to a particular ideology will be more difficult
to motivate by that way.
The Smart Idiot Effect, Risk vs Literacy |
It is not so obvious the
higher the degree of education in either liberal or conservative
ideology, the more difficult it is to persuade with a consensus
message (the “Smart
Idiot Effect”). For these folks a persuasive argument must
be delivered in a framing strategy, put threatening information in
a context that makes it palatable for building consensus.
So for long-term smokers
the framing message might be “digital
cigarettes will stop the craving to smoke” rather than “smoking will kill you”.
Does this explain the
disregard-for-facts and denial from city council during the VE
debacle? The research warns us to communicate
persuasively you must pick a strategy that is effective for the
type of people targeted, from political idealogs to
community passives. They say to try different approaches to see
which ones work in your world.
One
researcher says those who practice communication of science
facts do not invest enough in the communications in the
first place. He says further “It’s a
mistake to assume that valid science will communicate itself...” -LS
“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth — persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.” — John F. Kennedy (first posted at the Laguna Beach Patch by Roger Butow, most appropriate here)
ReplyDelete