New School Politics

Live Earth: A Waste of Money and Time?

Zach | 10 07 2007

If you're a first time visitor, you may want to subscribe to our RSS feed, which will keep you up to date with all the latest New School Politics posts. Thanks for visiting!

In the past, the Live ___ concerts have been hugely successful. Both, Live Aid and Live 8, have had a clear purpose in mind: raise money to either pay off debt or help to feed starving children. Al Gore, however, utilized his well-publicized Live Earth to “kick start a global movement” to react to global warming. Not everyone agrees with global warming, and there are certainly ways to persuade individuals to look at scientific backup in its favor.

Is a concert, however, the best way? After briefly attending the Washington, DC gathering at the National Museum of the American Indian and watching bits and pieces of the concert on TV, I can conclusively say that it’s most definitely not. Although it was the most watched webcast ever, it was not very well attended at the various locations throughout the world. Furthermore, would an anti-global warming activist attend or watch the concert? Short snippets between musical acts were dedicated to global warming lessons, most of which were ridiculously stupid.

The LA Times and several other sites point out some interesting facts about the concert, showcasing the hypocrisy of many of its participants. LA Times columnist Jonah Goldberg sums up the concert perfectly:

considering the energy required to put on the show, the nine Live Earth concerts doubtlessly raised more CO2 than awareness. NBC’s three-hour televised version got trounced by “Cops” and “America’s Funniest Home Videos.” Moreover, surely most of the people who attended or tuned in already knew about global warming before they saw the video tutorial about Ed Begley Jr.’s eco-friendly home and sanctimony-powered go-cart.

While I appreciate Gore’s efforts in attempting to help to solve the global warming problem, it’s difficult not to view much of this global warming “awareness” as hypocrisy as well. I’m not a staunch global-warming observer, but I don’t refuse to acknowledge that it exists either. Gore’s excellent film “An Inconvenient Truth” provides some excellent facts and justification for his claims. Regardless of global warming’s existence, Gore should have realized the impropriety his concert practiced. Why hold a concert railing against a problem you’re claiming to solve?

Last 5 posts by Zach

At Least She's Not a Quitter - June 5th, 2008
Fidel Castro Steps Down - February 19th, 2008
The New School Goes Road Trippin' - February 13th, 2008
Obama Outlines Economic Plan in New Speech - February 13th, 2008
Surprises Abound in a Stunning Super Tuesday - February 9th, 2008

Popularity: 72% [?]

Sphere: Related Content

The Live Earth: A Waste of Money and Time? by New School Politics, unless otherwise expressly stated, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.

Categories: Alternative Energy, Global Warming, Liberal Content, culture, environment, media
: Comments rss
: Trackback

3 responses

I have to agree that these kind of concerts and

Arthus Erea | 11 07 2007

I have to agree that these kind of concerts and events don’t work well for debatable subjects. While nobody can argue that children aren’t starving, an argument can be made against global warming. Therefore, without solid evidence such as that presented in “An Inconvenient Truth” then you are unlikely to be able to convince people. Essentially, you either believe there is a problem and will combat it, could care less (and thus don’t even know what Live Earth is), or are a staunch opposer of science and the environment. If you are the last, there is no way to convince you. If you are the second, then a “liberal” consert that few people know about won’t do much. And if you are of the first, I think you’re crazy to waste resources like this. Instead, the event should have only been a web cast. That way, minimal resources are used, yet you can reach millions of people.

For the record, I believe climate change is solid science and implement lots of measures to combat it on an individual level.

Bad concept from the beginning. His film produced far more

Paul Hillsdon | 11 07 2007

Bad concept from the beginning. His film produced far more buzz and provided far more information. I’m not exactly sure what their next step in the climate crisis campaign should’ve been, but holding a concert definitely wasn’t the right choice.