A Guilt-Driven Life
Photo from Shark Truth, a campaign to find alternatives to shark fin soup
A couple of weeks ago, I saw an interesting post from The Atlantic magazine come across Facebook. It was titled provocatively, “Is it okay to eat an inhumane meal if it’s traditional?”
The substance of the article was about the enjoyment of shark’s fin, which is a popular and controversial delicacy across Asia. The fins are procured in a process called “finning,” where fishermen cut them off and toss the sharks helplessly back in the ocean to die.
While not of the same magnitude at all, this reminded of an e-mail my mom sent me recently about LED Christmas lights. A proponent of the traditional, she, like many people, doesn’t think the new, energy efficient lights have the same fun holiday spirit as the antique lights of the past. And she doesn’t appreciate being made to feel bad about her preference.
Through our world’s history, changes in tradition have often been driven by societal pressure. Today, much of that pressure comes from the sustainability/social responsibility movement. When we talk about sustainability, our messages often hinge on morality—or guilt. By making “good” choices, you help save the world. And by making “bad” choices, you hurt the world. So, does guilt work?
In a word: Yes.
But maybe it’s not that simple.
Scientists, psychologists and marketers have been studying the effects of emotions on consumers for a long time. Not surprisingly, they play a huge role in the decisions we make.
In a research described in The New York Times earlier this year, scientists found that consumers who were once reacting with desire for expensive handbags now look upon the same products with something like repulsion—because the recession has conditioned them to feel guilty for considering something so expensive but non essential to their lives.
Many retailers see shame as an impediment to economic recovery. People don’t feel bad just about buying handbags. They feel bad about buying anything.
Researchers have even found that fear and guilt are more motivating than any other message, including hope.
“Making people feel good is less important than making people feel accountable when it comes to making wise decisions about self-protection,” wrote Kirsten A. Passyn of Salisbury University and Mita Sujan of Tulane University in the March 2006 issue of the Journal of Consumer Research.
But there is evidence that guilt gets its power from being different. The more people hear guilt-driven messages, the more savvy and skeptical they become. In essence, perhaps the more we play the “guilt card,” the less it works.
So, my question is: What role should guilt play in our advocacy of sustainability? Do we stand the best chance of success by making people feel accountable for their actions. Or, in the end, will guilt only turn people off?
What do you think?
Hi Jamie,
This is a very interesting post, and you’ve raised very important questions with regards to sustainability messaging. I have observed and analyzed so many campaigns around climate change and other environmental issues, that I have now come to the conclusion that guilt can “turn people off” as you said, and therefore that guilt can be a very significant obstacle to effective engagement and behavior change.
For instance, the most common messages that come when guilt is used for climate change comns is that we are all going to die, and that the apocalypse, end of civilization is near. When people hear such doomsday scenarios, they tend to feel like there is nothing they can do about climate warming.
Worse it can trigger incomprehension and make people feel less guilty in the end. As the French government recently announced plans to implement a carbon tax in the country (directly impacting consumers), I monitored several French blogs and forums…and all I could see was anger and criticism over a potential law, which was seen as unfair. The netizens/citizens 1) did not understand why the burden would fall on them and not the business community which is responsible for the great majority of CO2 emissions, 2) did not understand what was in it for them, and how such tax would help the country’s economy and competitiveness over the long-term.
Embracing sustainability should not be a moralistic experience. Instead of playing the ‘guilt card’, we need to sell the sustainability ideas to the consumers, citizens or even employees by making the case for it. And there are several tactics to prove sustainability’s worth.
-Linking sustainability to tangible health and wellness benefits that resonate well with consumers
-Linking green/sustainability with cost-saving, which tends to be a very effective selling point in today’s troubled times.
-Helping consumers become smarter and giving them the tools to make informed decisions and understand how to become sustainable
-Giving them a sense of greater (and positive) purpose by helping co-participate with the brands or companies to effect positive change. It is key to make the audience part of the solution.
All in all, I believe that sustainability messaging as to be solution-oriented and not problem-constrained in order to generate effective engagement, whether from consumers, employees or even citizens. I have recently written about it on my blog as I reviewed Greenpeace’s latest ad/comns campaign against nuclear energy in Germany.
What do you think?
Cheers,
Perrine
Very interesting comment, Perrine. This aligns with an interesting article from another blog we tweeted about yesterday that argued the green movement has become “boring” — http://www.popmatters.com/pm/feature/115627-boring-the-world-to-death.
In that post, the writer says green advocates have focused too much on facts and less on emotion, although I think what he’s really getting at is green has been about guilt. He compares Times Square to a climate change art exhibit across town. One appeals to our wonder, the other a depressing reminder.
I agree: One of the biggest problems with focusing on guilt messages is it leaves people feeling hopeless. How can you inspire action when it sounds like all is lost?
So often sustainability gets caught up in a moral/political Web. Most people get we have problems, and most people are supportive of tackling those problems. So, instead of beating them over the head about it, let’s talk about progress, which is fun and exciting. How can our imaginations tackle our most pressing challenges? How can we make life better now in the future? How can you help?
Playing the ‘guilt card’ reminds me of parents telling their children not to do something, but their children do it anyway just because they were told not to.
However, if a parent took the time to explain why a forbidden activity was deemed so and put the power of choice in the children’s hands perhaps that approach might yield more successful results.
In the long run, I think early education stands the best chance of crafting advocates of sustainability; just as we learned to read and write at a young age, teaching the youth about sustainability will become second nature, common practice and not an issue of whether they are recycling because they felt bad.
Anyone else feel the same way, or differently?