BulletProofBlog the blog on crisis communications

With the so-called “climate-gate” controversy putting global warming back in the news, companies with big carbon footprints might be tempted to revive the argument that global warming simply isn’t all that it’s cracked up to be. They should think twice.

For those who still doubt that global warming is a man made phenomenon, those e-mail messages leaked by a hacker who broke into some climate researcher’s computers make for great reading. But for big business to try to capitalize on the embarrassment would be to ignore the real audience – and thereby make a big communications mistake.

When it comes to the debate over climate change, corporate constituencies fall into three distinct categories. At one end of the spectrum there are the hard core environmentalists. At the other end, there are those who believe that global warming is nothing but a hoax perpetrated by left wing activists opposed to everything that business stands for. And in the middle, we find the vast majority of Americans who, while they may be genuinely concerned about global warming, are not so concerned that they are willing to make the kind of personal sacrifices that real change would require. Saving the planet is great, but not if I have to give up my air conditioned SUV.

Business won’t ever be able to convince the true believers that global warming isn’t a problem. And they don’t need to convince the deniers of anything at all. By process of elimination, that leaves the middle as the key corporate audience – and that’s why companies are well advised to steer clear of the global warming debate altogether.

By engaging in the debate, companies would just be fighting the battle on the other side’s home field. A protracted argument over whether global warming is a real problem is precisely what critics want. As long as they can keep Corporate America talking about the issue, their side gains traction.

Instead of trying to defend themselves against charges that they are still part of the problem, companies should instead focus on positive stories that will resonate with that big audience in the middle and give ordinary consumers the reassurance they need to justify their comfortable buying decisions. Those parked in the middle of the public opinion spectrum might feel bad about contributing to pollution, but they’ll feel good about supporting their community in some other fashion. The extremes of public opinion will cancel each other out.

Effective strategic decision making demands that you understand what really drives your audience to make decisions. Starting fights you can’t win and don’t need to be involved in at all is never a winning strategy.

David Bartlett is a Senior Vice President at Levick Strategic Communications, the nation’s top crisis communications firm He blog is an experienced communications strategist and crisis manager, and a contributing author to Bulletproof Blog. Connect with Levick on Twitter: @Levick.