2003

This short article discusses the use of staged events to draw attention to social movement issues by detailing the experience of one particular community group during the 1980s. The author discusses how Concerned Neighbours in Action (CNIA) developed a strategy that enabled them to force various levels of government to deal with the environmental damage and dangers caused by the Stringfellow hazardous waste site in southern California. The author draws some generalisations from this group's experiences in order to provide some guidelines for incorporating staged events into an overall media strategy.

The author points to the oft cited images of small Greenpeace zodiacs impeding the path of large tankers or whaling vessels as seminal examples of the power of staged events to draw media attention to social movement issues. This, however, raises the question of the problems that might be present for activist groups if they cannot control how the media frames these events and the inability of such images to fully convey the issues and messages of the group.



The answer to this problem is for staged events to be presented as part of a planned campaign of media interaction. CNIA was formed in 1980 in response to growing community concern about the Stringfellow toxic waste plant that was immediately adjacent to the town of Glen Avon, California. Between 1956 and 1972 over 34 million gallons of over 200 kinds of hazardous waste were dumped into the lagoons at the site creating serious community concerns about the quality of the groundwater and drawing serious community ire when the lagoon was partially dumped into nearby rivers following intensive rains.



At first, CNIA struggled to draw attention to their concerns, but they soon began to develop a comprehensive plan. They knew that they needed dramatic visuals if they were to get the necessary coverage of their grievances and influence the full range of their intended audiences - including government agencies, elected officials and the remainder of the community. This strategy began with a community meeting in 1980 to which the media and the executive officer of the local water control board were invited. The members showed movies, took questions from the audience and then asked a series of increasingly difficult yes/no answer questions of the executive officer, recording his responses on a large banner and then asking him to sign an "accountability agreement" at the end of the meeting. When he refused he was resoundingly booed by the audience and made a sheepish exit under the eye of the camera. By the next morning, a contaminated pond that had been brought up during the evening had been filled in and sealed.



The next organised strategy was the picketing of the state Governor. In this event the media served as a go-between the activists and the politician. The picketing was aimed at bringing attention to several contaminated wells and the demand for funds to get the affected families on the municipal water system. A polite and organised picketing of the governor's event made the media ask (on their own initiative) the governor when he planned to meet with the protestors. He responded by saying that he would meet with them immediately. When his office failed to contact them, CNIA notified the media who then began to phone his office enquiring about his intentions. This was followed up when CNIA sent two of its members to a fundraiser during which a member politely cornered the governor in front of the media and forced the governor to address the issue on the spot. The end result was the introduction of a bill for $17 million for incidental expenses resulting from the site.



The final strategy was a drive by the group to organise a congressional subcommittee hearing in the community that brought legislators face-to face with the people immediately affected by the pollution. This elicited substantial media coverage and led the committee to call for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to take immediate action and to establish methods for public participation at cleanup sites.



The author suggests that there were several reasons for CNIA's success that can be distilled into a series of guidelines:

• The staged event should be a tactic used in a broader media strategy.
• A group's media strategy should be a part of a planned campaign that takes place over a period of time.
• A group's media strategy should be dictated by the goals and objectives of the campaign.
• A well thought out and planned staged event that piggybacks on the media's interests will increase the likelihood that the media will frame the group positively.
• The staged event's effectiveness is leveraged when media representatives become intermediaries between the group and the group's targeted publics.
• While staged events are often planned to gain media coverage, they are most effective when they target all the major publics the activist group is attempting to influence, not just the media.
• Activist activities, i.e., staged events, need to be planned so that when the media cover the event, their stories help the public follow the progression of the situation.

The author concludes by noting that CNIA has become a leader in the field of policy development with regards to the cleanup of contaminated sites throughout the US. This is in large part owing to their experimentation with staged events, and their perseverance in the face of adversity.

Please note: the full text of this article is not available online. Please see the source, which is available only by subscription or within academic libraries, for the full article.

Public Relations Quarterly, Spring 2003, Vol.48, Issue 1.