Blogprompt 5: Cultural festivities v Sustainablity

Christmas is coming!
Cultural festivals, such as Christmas, are undoubtedly enjoyable and an important time for families and friends to relax together. Many have important religious significance. On the other hand, such events are often defined by excess and waste...lights, fireworks, over-packaging, excessive spending, over-eating and embarrassing self indulgence.


What do you think? Is Christmas sustainable? How would it all work in it a changed world?
Or should all the 'do-gooders' leave our festivals alone!!!!

Christmas is supposed to be a time for cheer, a time to spend with friends and family but can it still be so in a sustainable future? Christmas can be sustainable but will the population be able to fore-go their love for shop brought presents and excessive house decorations? It's a difficult question to answer because everyone is entitled to their own views, some can see the benefits of being sustainable but can't let go of their lifestyle now to see it through.

Throughout the holidays, their have been campaigns to encourage people to act more sustainable, buying recycled wrapping paper and presents, getting rid of unwanted lights or using real trees that come from a sustainable source. This is all well and I'm sure there are many who have tried to help their environment through this cause but many do not want to give up their old decorations (which many are emotionally attached to) for "second hand ones" for a future that is balancing on a knife's edge and is constantly changing.

However, many can argue that children recognize Christmas as a time for presents rather than their religious or cultural background. By getting children to make cards and/or presents for their family rather than purchase them from a local store makes the gift more personal, brings them closer to their family and teaches them about recycling and sustainability and that it's all about the giving, not just the receiving (as well as save money).

Many people recycle their waste during the year, however when it comes to the cultural festivities, no short cuts are taken. With all the deals on, we overspend yet still think we don't have enough food. This year alone we have had to throw away an estimated 3 million tonnes of waste, that's a tenth of the annual total just for one day of festivities.

No matter how hard we try, it will be difficult to mix a our love for Christmas and a sustainable future, many will not want to give up their current festivities for another, no matter how environmentally friendly it seems.

Referencing

Eartheasy, 2009. How to Have a Green Christmas [online] Available at: http://www.eartheasy.com/give_sustainchristmas.htm (Accessed 2nd January 2010)

Blogprompt 4: Media

To what extent do best selling UK newspapers cover stories related to "serious" issues? To what extent would you think it is their role to do so? In your opinion does the tabloid media and "low budget entertainment" (reality shows, soaps) have too much power and influence in this country?


When overhearing a conversation between friends, you don't hear them discussing any "serious" issues like Climate Change, you hear snippets of what happened in Eastenders or Coronation Street. When there's a power cut, the first thing on most of the population's mind is that they'll miss their favourite programme not on whether the hospital's have power or whether the street and traffic lights are out.

As I personally don't watch any reality shows, soaps or read the newspaper, I can only speak/write about other people's experiences rather than through my own experiences. Like I said/wrote in my previous blog, I believe that as citizens we have the right to know what is happening, even if we don't understand it all. The media writes about "serious" issues to a certain extent, but only if it they believe that the majority of the population want to hear about it. Even then, it is sometimes twisted to make it more interesting, they will leave important facts out or will only show one side/view of the story.

The problem with the media is that if they mention one thing the wrong way or take it too far, it can start a panic. For example, mass hysteria about the Swine Flu was provoked by the Media who just saw it as a good story. On a yearly basis, thousands of people can get the "regular" flu or a flu mutation (which aren't that different to Swine Flu) in just one country, however a few secluded cases of Swine Flu in varying countries and suddenly we're in an epidemic!

The media in my opinion has too much power, effecting our lives in such a way that we sometimes don't even notice. We have become dependant on reading our weekly newspaper, magazine or watching our favourite soap and go into a panic when we miss it for any reason. Our lives shouldn't be ruled by what we read or watch as it has most likely been manipulated to put it into a better light, make it seem more interesting and/or shows only a specific side to a story. Some soaps show serious issues but in a more comical or dramatic way, to make it more user friendly but shouldn't we also hear/see the real story too?

References
Image from: http://www.art.co.uk/products/p14798656-sa-i3067315/posters.htm

Blogprompt 3: Empowered Citizenship

To what extent do you think that it is your duty as a citizen to be 'informed'? Are you informed? How do you get to be informed about serious issues? To what extent do you think that you should leave the complicated decisions up to others?

"It is not for him to pride himself who loveth his own country, but rather for him who loveth the whole world. The earth is but one country and mankind its citizens" ~ Baha'u'llah

We are all citizens of our country and our world so we should all be informed of any news that may have an effect upon our lives and well being but this is not done often enough. When we do receive it, most of the time, it is heard through the media (newspapers or TV generally), however it's been twisted to make it more interesting, the facts have been blown out of proportion and they generally show the writer's point of view, sometimes practically tell us what to believe. Scientists and politicians may seem very professional but many don't take into account all of the sides of any situation, sticking to their views and the views of their superiors because their the ones who at the end of the day, give them their wage.

To some extent, I can see why it is better to leave any complicated or serious issues up the experts in that field, however we should still be told about it and given our chance to have a say instead of being cut out completely and allowing the "experts" to make the decisions for us. It seems unfair that they should have all the say in topics that effects magnitudes of people just because of their profession and position in society. Just because they have a high paying job doesn't mean that they're good at it and are always right, everyone makes mistakes but theirs could have catastrophic effects. When something goes wrong, the scientists and politicians would rather blame someone else rather than admit to it.

Being a citizen is like working in a team, you need a mixture of people with different skills, ideas and views to get the best result because if its combination of these attributes and opinion. By allowing just the scientists and politicians to make our decision, any useful ideas or views that we "ordinary" citizens have are ignored and the final decision may not be the best for the entire community/country/world as a whole.

Being a citizen means that we have the right to know what is going on and to be informed about any changes that are being made that could effect our lives. We should be able to have our say in any important decisions, not influenced by propaganda in the media or the high-waged people in society because at the end of the day, we are all citizens and each of us are as important as everyone else because we all share this one world. Any decisions made should be made by the whole community and not only a privileged few.


References
Quote from: http://www.quotegarden.com/patriotism.html

Blogprompt 2: "An Inconvenient Truth"

Al Gore (and the IPCC) won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007 largely for the production of the film 'An Inconvenient Truth'. The committee cited "their efforts to build up and disseminate (spread) knowledge about man-made climate change". To what extent do you think this was deserved? Having watched this film in class did you feel that your opinion (or perhaps the opinion of others) to the issue of climate change could be positively influenced? What did you think of this film? Was it effective?

Having watched the film, I believe that many people's (including my own) opinion of climate changed will have been influenced. At first, I thought that he was joking around about the rate at which ice caps are melting and how the CO2 emissions will increase so dramatically because the numbers seemed so unreal. Everyone knew that climate change was a problem, we just didn't know that it was so big. Even the skeptics will have a hard time finding something that suggests hat we (humankind) don't play any role in what is happening. I think that the movie will have spurred people into trying to think more sustainably even if their overall effect on the world's problem is miniscule.

The Nobel Peace Prize was deserved by both Al Gore and the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) as they have shown Climate Change for the dangerous future that it will be unless something drastic is done about it now, even then the temperature will still rise but not as drastically. Many would believe that the IPCC deserved the Prize but not Al Gore as he didn't "really do anything", however I believe if anyone else had stood up on that stage and delivered a speech/presentation on climate change, they would be ignored because all of their ideas and data would have been heard before. However, Al Gore's data was unseen and his images showed the effect we are having right now compared to our past as well as some images that showed our most likely future and because of his political past, his theories were not just ignored, especially since he was backed by the IPCC.

"An Inconvenient Truth" was displayed in an unusual manner (based around a powerpoint), however this made it stand out more than the average documentary and Al Gore presented it in a fun way, full of small jokes with lots of emotive images and thought-sturring quotes. Overall it was a very effective way of presenting the findings in a way that made them stand out rather than in a long-winded speech.

The SKEPTICS VIEW in media: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8299079.stm

IPCC Website: http://www.ipcc.ch/

Blogprompt 1 - Sustainablity of your lifestyle

What actions could you (in theory) undertake that would improve the 'sustainability' of your lifestyle? What might be preventing you from doing these?

Like many people in the world, i want to lower my carbon footprint, help the environment and become more sustainable however i have found that i am held back by costs and general lazyness.
- The obvious thing i would do is recycle as much of my waste as possible, which is becoming easier as more products are becoming more recyclable. Despite this, some products still can not be recycled easily as they are a mix of materials and this would mean sorting out my rubbish which takes time.
- I would leave products on standby when they are not in use however i find myself to lazy to do this. Plus if i do, i have noticed that may settings are reset and i do not have the time to keep changing them back. Similarily, i would remember to turn lights off when i am not in that room however a mixture of lazyness and a bad memory stop me from doing this simple task.
- I would buy products that are more environmentally friendly and/or the materials come from a sustainable resource, however this could become expensive. I have noticed that some of these "sustainable" products do not have the same satisfactory levels of the regular products i am used to purchasing. I find myself wondering if i should have purchased my usual product which is more econmically sound on my bank account rather than a sustainable product , even though it is more environmentally friendly.
- I could find a job and help my parents by more sustainable products, however i would rather spend my time at home on the computer or reading a book rather than working shifts in a shop. I could also offer to help out more around the house, doing jobs and saving my parents from extra petrol costs but once again i am stopped by my laziness.

I have tried to mend my lazy ways. I now walk to Avenue campus from my home (a journey of approximately 2 miles) and shuttle bus to Park, repeating this process to get back home. I try to by products that i actually need rather than want (as we throw away approx. 1/3 of our food a year, at least 340,000 tonnes still in date www.wrap.org.uk) and products that are environmetally friendly and come from a sustainable source, however this is only achieved if the price is right. By realising my mistakes, i have began to take action and i can only hope that everyone else realises this soon so that we can begin to save our environment.