skittish, flicking from channel to channel like a hum- mingbird. In such a world, how do we attract and keep an audi- ence? The same way everyone else does—by shouting, by being sensational, sexier, more violent, and more superfi- cial. When I began as host of The Nature of Things, we attracted between 18 and 25 percent of the audience at that time, and when a rating of less than half-a-million viewers came in, we were very worried. We haven’t had a million people in over 10 years! In fact, the last time we had a blockbuster audience was for a program titled “Phallacies,” all about the penis. “ In the neurosciences, there is a fascinating phenome- non called “habituation.” When a neuron is isolated with an electrode inserted to measure electrical impulses, it can be stimulated and shown to be excited with an elec- trical discharge. When the stimulus is repeated, the response is smaller and slower. But when repeated stim- ulation results in no response, the neuron is “habituated” and has to be left alone for a while to recover its sensitiv- ity to the stimulus. Psychologically, there is an analogous observation. When a buzzer goes off, we may be startled and find it too loud to think. But if the buzzer continues, over time, we find the noise recedes and we don’t even notice it any more. We can extend the analogy of neuronal habituation in our viewing habits. In the cacophony of programs all clamouring for attention, our demand for novelty increases so we want more jolts per minute or we think “it’s boring,” “it drags,” or “it’s too slow.” And this habit- uation occurs even more rapidly among journalists. When I try to get media attention to climate change, I’m often told, “that’s an old story,’ “what’s the new angle?,” or “we've covered that to death.” We can see it in our attention to terrorism. When a hostage is taken and murdered, we are shocked and out- raged. But subsequent killings of hostages fail to elicit the same level of response. We’ve heard about it already. So in trying to get media attention, terrorists turn to mul- tiple hostages, suicide bombings, taking over planes and using them as weapons, beheadings on camera, and cap- turing and murdering hundreds of children. Where will it end? Each escalation in horror becomes a new threshold that the next one will have to top. And so it goes with environmental issues. Is it any wonder that environmentalists are sometimes dismissed as fear mongers in a world where dangers and risks must continually escalate or else be dismissed as yesterday’s story? Surely we need a better way for society to engage in such important issues. Otherwise, in this game of one- upmanship, the public will always lose. Take the Nature Challenge and learn more at . When Conspiracy Theories Go Mainstream aC McCullough, OP Columnis I was reading a fascinating book the other day by Skeptic Magazine founder Michael Shermer entitled, Why People Believe Weird Things. In it, Shermer analyzes at great lengths the various bizarre, fringe subcul- tures that exist within our society, such as alien-believers, creation-scientists, and holocaust deniers. At one point he quotes a list of the most common characteristics of fringe groups. The biggest common thread among all fringe ideologies is the belief that a tiny, unrepresentative group controls everything, and uses its powers for sinister intents. This group obviously controls the US government, and by extension, most other governments of the world. The extent of their control makes democratic government a sham, and thus participating in elections is deemed pointless. Fringe believers who hold this “tiny group” theory are likewise united in their belief that they alone hold the supreme truth, and that most of main- stream society has been duped by the tiny group’s propaganda efforts. What struck me as interesting about this list was the way in which it can so easily be used to describe much of modern-day political discourse. Conspiracy theories have now gone main- stream in many political spheres. While once logic and solid evi- dence were necessary elements in forming a political world-view, increasingly, such rational think- ing is being eclipsed by the easy answers and circular reasoning of conspiracy the- ories. For example, the Far Left has always relied on conspiracy theories to some degree, but in this current environment of war and terrorism, their views have become even mote extreme. In their rhet- oric, the tiny group that controls the world continues to be the bourgeoisie capitalist, “business” class. Words like “corporation” and “multinational” are thrown atound as the world’s villains, without any sort of attempt at offering a more specific definition as to whom these monsters are. It is “corporations” that control the White House, and corpora- tions that enslave the third world. Corporations start wars for their own interest, and are completely oblivious and indifferent to human suffering. To be part of a corporation is to be a soulless drone with blood on your hands. Corporations are all united in their goals and all serve each others’ interests. Participating in democracy is thus meaningless, as all political parties are part of the ominous “corporate agenda.” In the Middle East, by contrast, it’s the continued on page 11 OChober 13/2008 |