Celebrity Precedents: Assessing New Politicization and Climate Change Policy Rhetoric in Leonardo DiCaprio’s "Before the Flood"

L. Blitstein
{"title":"Celebrity Precedents: Assessing New Politicization and Climate Change Policy Rhetoric in Leonardo DiCaprio’s \"Before the Flood\"","authors":"L. Blitstein","doi":"10.4079/2578-9201.2(2019).08","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"• This article juxtaposes the demonstrated prevalence of celebrity politics with that of climate change policy inaction in the United States, to contextualize Leonardo DiCaprio’s ecodocumentary, Before the Flood within its current sociopolitical moment. I argue these components work in tandem to structure DiCaprio’s message within a social framework accommodating him as a political figure. In turn, the documentary can be conceived of as both a contributor and a product of new celebrity political discourse serving to further the politicization of climate change. Anthropogenic climate change is the most pressing issue of the 21st century and beyond, as humans’ ability to continue living on Earth and maintaining business as usual affects every conceivable industry and social construct we have collectively built. In November of 2018, the U.S. Global Change Research Program, a federal agency, released the “Fourth National Climate Assessment,” (2018), with over a thousand pages of evidence from nearly 300 scientists, presenting clear, unequivocal proof that humans have caused climate change. The second chapter, “Our Changing Climate,” consolidates findings from observed warming, as well as formal detection and attribution studies, such as computer models and simulations, to support the conclusion that humans have contributed to a total “likely...global average temperature increase” of 1.1°F to 1.4°F (0.6°C to 0.8°) between 1951 and 2010 (p.76). The report points specifically to greenhouse gas emissions, aerosol production, ozone depletion, and changes in land cover, such as that due to deforestation, as causes. Following the evidence of human impacts to the climate, the assessment outlines how, after leaving climate change largely unattended to since our first inclinations of its existence, we have nearly reached the point of no return from a world to be inundated with not-so-natural disasters, droughts, famines, and floods of near-biblical proportions. The report was not the first of its kind, or even the beginning of climate change research, which begs the question of how climate change policy in the United States has seemingly failed to enforce stringent guidelines in the face of over 185 years of what William Forster Lloyd (1832) conceptualized as a tragedy of the commons, an unwillingness for society to maintain the environment without a directive to do so. Joseph Fourier’s 1824 discovery of what became known as the greenhouse effect led to Svante Arrhenius’s conclusion in 1896 that the industrial burning of coal was contributing to global warming (Crawford, 2018). However, neither an approaching 200 years of climate change research, establishment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), or consensus among scientists on the dire state of climate change has prompted consistent governmental intervention in the United States to mitigate the consequences or reduce the nation’s carbon footprint to pre-industrial levels. The United States is a world leader, yet it has largely resisted full commitment to the global conversation around climate change mitigation as a civic duty until now. The United States Congress set forth six findings detailing the consequences of human-made climate change in the Global Change Research Act of 1990, and the act mandated subsequent updates, including the 2018 report (“Legal Mandate,” 1990). Yet the word “climate” is markedly absent from its title, obscuring the purpose of the act from the average American, and in the following years since the original decree, the knowledge offered through these reports has not amounted to significant action. In 2006, former vice president Al Gore released An Inconvenient Truth (AIT), but even this explicit call for action on climate change did not see immediate mobilization despite winning an Academy Award, prompting Gore to release a sequel in 2017 (The Climate Reality Project). LITERATURE REVIEW Overview of Climate Change Research and Rhetoric in the United States Communication, CCAS ‘19, lisablitstein5@gwu.edu","PeriodicalId":371706,"journal":{"name":"The George Washington University Undergraduate Review","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The George Washington University Undergraduate Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4079/2578-9201.2(2019).08","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

• This article juxtaposes the demonstrated prevalence of celebrity politics with that of climate change policy inaction in the United States, to contextualize Leonardo DiCaprio’s ecodocumentary, Before the Flood within its current sociopolitical moment. I argue these components work in tandem to structure DiCaprio’s message within a social framework accommodating him as a political figure. In turn, the documentary can be conceived of as both a contributor and a product of new celebrity political discourse serving to further the politicization of climate change. Anthropogenic climate change is the most pressing issue of the 21st century and beyond, as humans’ ability to continue living on Earth and maintaining business as usual affects every conceivable industry and social construct we have collectively built. In November of 2018, the U.S. Global Change Research Program, a federal agency, released the “Fourth National Climate Assessment,” (2018), with over a thousand pages of evidence from nearly 300 scientists, presenting clear, unequivocal proof that humans have caused climate change. The second chapter, “Our Changing Climate,” consolidates findings from observed warming, as well as formal detection and attribution studies, such as computer models and simulations, to support the conclusion that humans have contributed to a total “likely...global average temperature increase” of 1.1°F to 1.4°F (0.6°C to 0.8°) between 1951 and 2010 (p.76). The report points specifically to greenhouse gas emissions, aerosol production, ozone depletion, and changes in land cover, such as that due to deforestation, as causes. Following the evidence of human impacts to the climate, the assessment outlines how, after leaving climate change largely unattended to since our first inclinations of its existence, we have nearly reached the point of no return from a world to be inundated with not-so-natural disasters, droughts, famines, and floods of near-biblical proportions. The report was not the first of its kind, or even the beginning of climate change research, which begs the question of how climate change policy in the United States has seemingly failed to enforce stringent guidelines in the face of over 185 years of what William Forster Lloyd (1832) conceptualized as a tragedy of the commons, an unwillingness for society to maintain the environment without a directive to do so. Joseph Fourier’s 1824 discovery of what became known as the greenhouse effect led to Svante Arrhenius’s conclusion in 1896 that the industrial burning of coal was contributing to global warming (Crawford, 2018). However, neither an approaching 200 years of climate change research, establishment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), or consensus among scientists on the dire state of climate change has prompted consistent governmental intervention in the United States to mitigate the consequences or reduce the nation’s carbon footprint to pre-industrial levels. The United States is a world leader, yet it has largely resisted full commitment to the global conversation around climate change mitigation as a civic duty until now. The United States Congress set forth six findings detailing the consequences of human-made climate change in the Global Change Research Act of 1990, and the act mandated subsequent updates, including the 2018 report (“Legal Mandate,” 1990). Yet the word “climate” is markedly absent from its title, obscuring the purpose of the act from the average American, and in the following years since the original decree, the knowledge offered through these reports has not amounted to significant action. In 2006, former vice president Al Gore released An Inconvenient Truth (AIT), but even this explicit call for action on climate change did not see immediate mobilization despite winning an Academy Award, prompting Gore to release a sequel in 2017 (The Climate Reality Project). LITERATURE REVIEW Overview of Climate Change Research and Rhetoric in the United States Communication, CCAS ‘19, lisablitstein5@gwu.edu
名人先例:在莱昂纳多·迪卡普里奥的《洪水之前》中评估新的政治化和气候变化政策修辞
•本文将名人政治的盛行与美国气候变化政策的不作为并列,将莱昂纳多·迪卡普里奥(Leonardo DiCaprio)的生态纪录片《洪水之前》(Before the Flood)置于当前的社会政治时刻。我认为这些组成部分串联在一起,将迪卡普里奥的信息结构在一个社会框架内,使他成为一个政治人物。反过来,这部纪录片可以被看作是新的名人政治话语的贡献者和产品,这些话语有助于进一步将气候变化政治化。人为气候变化是21世纪及以后最紧迫的问题,因为人类继续在地球上生活和维持正常业务的能力影响着我们共同建立的每一个可以想象的行业和社会结构。2018年11月,联邦机构美国全球变化研究计划发布了《第四次国家气候评估报告》(2018),其中有来自近300名科学家的一千多页证据,提供了人类造成气候变化的清晰、明确的证据。第二章,“我们正在变化的气候”,整合了从观测到的变暖的发现,以及正式的检测和归因研究,如计算机模型和模拟,以支持人类对总“可能……1951年至2010年间,全球平均气温上升了1.1°F至1.4°F(0.6°C至0.8°C)(第76页)。该报告特别指出,温室气体排放、气溶胶产生、臭氧消耗和土地覆盖变化(如森林砍伐造成的变化)都是原因。根据人类对气候影响的证据,该评估概述了自我们第一次倾向于气候变化的存在以来,气候变化在很大程度上是如何被忽视的,我们几乎已经达到了一个不太自然的灾害、干旱、饥荒和近乎圣经比例的洪水淹没的世界的临界点。这份报告并不是同类报告中的第一份,甚至也不是气候变化研究的开端,它回避了一个问题:面对185年来威廉·福斯特·劳埃德(William Forster Lloyd, 1832年)所定义的“公地悲剧”,即社会在没有指令的情况下不愿维护环境,美国的气候变化政策似乎未能执行严格的指导方针。约瑟夫·傅立叶(Joseph Fourier)在1824年发现了后来被称为温室效应的现象,这使得斯万特·阿伦尼乌斯(Svante Arrhenius)在1896年得出结论,即工业燃烧煤炭导致了全球变暖(Crawford, 2018)。然而,无论是近200年的气候变化研究、政府间气候变化专门委员会(IPCC)的成立,还是科学家们对气候变化可怕状态的共识,都没有促使美国政府持续干预,以减轻后果或将国家的碳足迹减少到工业化前的水平。美国是一个世界领导者,但直到现在,它在很大程度上一直拒绝全面参与围绕减缓气候变化的全球对话,将其视为一种公民义务。美国国会在《1990年全球变化研究法案》中提出了六项调查结果,详细说明了人为气候变化的后果,该法案要求随后进行更新,包括2018年的报告(“法律授权”,1990)。然而,标题中明显没有“气候”一词,使普通美国人对该法案的目的模糊了,而且在最初法令颁布后的几年中,通过这些报告提供的知识并没有达到重大的行动。2006年,美国前副总统阿尔·戈尔(Al Gore)发布了《难以忽视的真相》(AIT),但即使是这部明确呼吁对气候变化采取行动的电影,尽管获得了奥斯卡奖,但也没有立即动员起来,促使戈尔在2017年发布了续集(《气候现实项目》)。《气候变化研究与美国传播学修辞学综述》,CCAS第19期,lisablitstein5@gwu.edu
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信