In smarter networks by way of higher narratives, I famous that there must be a dominant narrative to counter “of us who’ve acquired nothing however conspiracies and medieval fantasies to base their arguments upon.” A brand new body is required, not factual counter-arguments. That is how George Lakoff explains it, “1) Repetition strengthens the synapses in neural circuits that folks use in considering 2) Whoever frames first has a bonus 3) Negating a body prompts and strengthens it.” Mainly, Lakoff states that whoever frames the narrative first has a bonus and that negating a body solely prompts and strengthens it. So responding to trolls and conspiracy theorists, which we frequently really feel compelled to do, solely makes the buggers stronger — an understanding of my confusion.
Our native electrical energy utility (NB Energy) is proposing a fracked gasoline and diesel powered electrical producing station in our city, inhabitants ±10,000. In one of many close by cities the native council was given a presentation that used ‘framing’ to point out the knowledge imbalances on this state of affairs. The city council proceedings can be found on YouTube and the presentation begins simply after 8:00 minutes. It’s in French.
Stéphane begins by stating that the gasoline plant is a query of framing (cadrage in French), occurring to notice that how data is offered influences notion and that NB Energy solely offered the benefits and doesn’t focus on dangers. They use scare ways of Winter energy outages and folks freezing of their properties, to push their agenda. As soon as these narratives are framed, they’re onerous to dislodge.
This plant will likely be constructed by an American firm and can import fracked methane gasoline from the USA for 25 years. The proponents name it a “Swiss Military Knife” to handle dips in energy, whereas opponents (I’m one) see it as a long-term supply of air and water air pollution in addition to a danger to wildlife on a crucial migratory hall — the Chignecto Isthmus.
What I discover most attention-grabbing is how these opposing the gasoline plant are portrayed by the proponents — hippies and tree-huggers comprised of the same old left-wing suspects. Feedback on social media by a devoted group right here remind me of Mooks who will do something to assist their Knight (what Venkatesh Rao calls the Web of Beefs). These Mooks are intent on creating fixed doubt and outrage.
The framing by the proponents is concentrated on financial advantages solely, whereas opponents are involved with issues not discovered on a stability sheet — well being, nature, biodiversity. Proponents state that there will likely be a crucial lack of energy by 2028 if this plant will not be constructed whereas concurrently saying that the plant will solely function 7% of the time, at a price of $1.52 billion to construct and $3.5 billion to function. Whereas working, the plant will draw 7 million litres of water per day. Conversely, opponents have proven by way of skilled witness on the utility board hearings {that a} battery system might be constructed for $1.2 billion with no recurring gasoline prices and no emissions.
This can be a story of competing narratives and we are going to quickly see which one will dominate.
