Whilst policy makers, business representatives, world leaders, activists, journalists and many more had gathered in Madrid for the UN’s annual two-week climate summit – COP25 – a group of engaged communication professionals met on the 4th of December at the annual EACD (European Association of Communication Directors) Forum in Geneva. This year’s theme was ‘Communications in the light of the SDGs’. Very apt.
Various bubbles collided there. The believers, the sceptics, the challengers, the quiet ones. The idea was that they would mingle at the Forum. The agreed set-up was for the speakers to share their thoughts, each for around 5 minutes, after which the people in the audience would be asked to huddle together to discuss the various dilemmas, options, pitfalls. The auditorium was traditionally set-up, rows going up (similar to another experience I have had recently). Yet, I wanted to take the challenge for people to get into little groups.
It worked. In small groups people discussed what our speakers Sarah Noble, Inge Massen-Biemans, Borjana Pervan, Roland Sladek and Lukasz Bochenek had brought to the fore. Can one work across conflicting SDGs, do you have to reference the SDGs in your storytelling, can emotions be combined with facts in the creation of narratives, what is authenticity in all this, and does the communication function have the ability (or invitation) to drive change?
The room buzzed, unsurprising in a room full of communicators. Same had happened upon opening the Forum, when I had proposed that people would exchange some thoughts with their neighbours, the ones they did not know. After about 15 minutes or so after exploring the communications/SDGs dilemmas, everyone reconvened and shared their insights in plenary. Some discussion continued between the speakers and the audience. The wisdom in the room surfaced. At least a little.
As a facilitator, I then had the opportunity to summarize, but purposefully decided not to and said as much. A lot had been shared and suggested, some contradictory issues, some common themes. There might be some confusion. I told everyone that was a good place to be; the space of being confused. Only when one has entered that space, in the context of the daunting reality of providing for a better future (which is what the SDGs advocate after all), will one realise that moving forward means taking specific decisions and making certain choices. If I would have shared a summary, I would have suggested – or at least alluded to – a particular path forward. It was not up to me to determine that.
Afterwards someone told me he had wished to challenge everyone a little more, but did not think it appropriate. He said ‘our world is on fire, don’t people see that?’ I told him to share that challenge next time. After all, we need to challenge each other and challenge our comfort zones. Particularly at these kind of gatherings, where many see Greta as some ‘obnoxious little girl who should be at school’.
Greta being escorted upon arrival in Madrid
Thinking of Greta, she says the following about her way of traveling: "I’m not traveling like this because I want everyone to do so, I’m doing this to send a message that it is impossible to live sustainably today & that needs to change. It needs to become much easier." I learned that Coldplay decided to cancel touring until they can find a carbon-neutral way to deliver shows. Talking ‘choices and challenging comfort zones’! I remember American author Jonathan Safran Foer and his suggestion to think carefully when making a decision – when you are about to book that flight or eat that burger. Before making that decision, think for at least six seconds (he might have suggested ten), then see whether you really want to make that decision. Quite powerful. I know for the ‘converted out there’ this means incremental change, yet I believe it quite evocative.
That same morning, before the Forum, the EACD board had met and debated a potential EACD statement that was focused on some key principles that would guide the practice of our trade, set in the context of our changing society. The board did not manage to agree with the statement. There was a feeling of insufficient time, not being accurately prepared to sign off as well as a desire to go deeper. Finalising the statement then would have created a (too) radical statement for some or a ‘watered down version’ for others, losing all its meaning. It was agreed to explore this subject more profoundly and make it part of the EACD Summit that will take place in Amsterdam on the 14th and 15th of May 2020.
Looking back I realise that in order to have an impact we need to focus on outcomes. Yet, we don’t – sufficiently - and we get lost in our activities. That is why we need one another to ensure we stay the course. Being an optimist (and being spirited), I would propose we continue on this journey. What do you think? Are Greta and Coldplay setting the right example? Do you have any suggestions for the EACD? I hope I have offered you some ideas to chew on, and I do recommend to read Jonathan Safran Foer! Happy reading.
