As you and Sara Peach point out, it really is about making it personal and relevant to the audience. But, more interesting still — how the climate change subject is taken so ‘extremely’ personally by some even though they have no real context for caring. They are insulated by their mid-level education, their mid-level job, their mid-income neighborhood from really needing to ever think one way or another about the matter. But for some it can border on the violent reaction you get from an alcoholic in denial – like you attacked them physically somehow. How do you explain that? How do you produce a video that teaches and informs a ‘denial-viewer’ under those conditions?

You are maybe raising a broader question about video and how interactivity changes the instructional media value of the content. There are videos (like TV shows and movies) you just sit there and watch – couch-potato-style and have no real desire or responsibility to act on (because you can’t, yet). And nowadays, there are videos on the internet with supporting text (like in this blog) that let you comment back and get involved interactively in a discussion about the subject. How the psychologies of learning and behavior change under the circumstances are fascinating. The questions about climate change for the ‘denial-viewer’ become ever more complex. This would be a great research study – how do they cope? They won’t flame the writer/producer with invective without knowing the mix of audience opinion.

Of course, as you said Ron – with all the turmoil around the planet, it doesn’t seem like it will be that long before it begins to effect everyone VERY personally. Our municipal managers are already tasked with making contingency plans for rising temperatures and water levels, food and energy scarcities, and for the rising discontent of the have-nots. It may already be too late for the kind of remediation possible with a simple video.