Santa Cruz Good Times

Saturday
Aug 01st
Text size
  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size

To Ban or Not To Ban

pileofplasticThe last installment in a rhetorical analysis of the single-use plastic bag debate

 

As I have discussed in the past three blog entries, and as Rebekah Fox and Joshua Frye state in their 2010 article, “Tensions of Praxis: A New Taxonomy for Social Movements,” “the relationship between the communication and environment is critical, but difficult to explain.”



In order to achieve a more enlightened human-nature relationship, we must first look at the discourse surrounding our practices with synthetic materials. Rhetoric is an instrument that social movement leaders and organizations use to achieve a number of different effects. Both groups I have discussed in my analysis are trying to achieve an environmental change through transformation of thought. The plastic corporations—the ACC and SPI—are centering their rhetorical argument on recycling. Whereas the environmental groups—Save the Bay and Surfrider Foundation—are moving more towards reusable bags as an end goal, ultimately getting rid of both plastic and paper bags, thus abandoning the throwaway lifestyle our culture has adopted.

It is fascinating to see the direction each side takes in their fight to either ban or not ban single-use plastic bags. Changing human behavior takes time. Both groups seem to agree that we need to change the way we think about our throwaway living. Plastic lobbyists go about this by highlighting the benefits of recycling and the innovations plastics have allowed. Environmental groups attack this concept by pushing for reusable bags to replace all single-use items. Through the means of discourse and visual rhetoric used by each group in the plastic bag debate, each side creates relevant arguments against and for the issue at hand. This analysis attempts to highlight the functions each group’s rhetoric in this debate is trying to achieve.

We are in the era of disposability and we are now recognizing that our plastic throwaways do not simply go away. This realization has caused us to rethink our relationship with single-use items. Each side of the debate has proven how powerful rhetorical arguments can be. Both the plastic corporations and environmental groups in this debate have started to rethink society’s relationship with the material world through their research and verbal discussions.

As the debate continues, which side of the argument do you side with? Paper, plastic or reusable? I invite you to look at fact and myth sheets for yourself and decide where you stand on the plastic versus paper debate, and whether communities around the world should continue to ban or not ban plastic shopping bags. The single-use plastic debate doesn’t look like it will end anytime soon, and by examining the rhetoric from each side of the debate we gain more insight into how each side uses persuasive tactics to transform our thoughts on the issue at hand.

Useful links and fact sheets:

-Save the Bay: http://www.savesfbay.org/bay-vs-bag
http://www.savesfbay.org/sites/default/files/MythvFact_bags_final.pdf

-Surfrider Foundation: http://www.surfrider.org/programs/entry/rise-above-plastics

-American Chemistry Council: http://plastics.americanchemistry.com/MajorMyths

-The Progressive Bag Affiliates: http://www.bagtheban.com/
http://www.plasticbagfacts.com/Main-Menu/Fast-Facts

-Society of the Plastics Industry: http://www.plasticsindustry.org/AboutPlastics/content.cfm?ItemNumber=712&;navItemNumber=1123

 


Jamie Foster is a second year graduate student in communication studies at San Francisco State University, where she is currently studying the discourse used within the plastic bag debate and how each side—plastic corporations and environmental groups—construct their arguments. Good Times hosted four blogs by Jamie about this subject. If you would like to see a complete version of her paper or have any questions please email her at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .

 

Comments (1)Add Comment
...
written by G from Sverige, December 13, 2011
Interesting series of articles, points out how perspectives are influenced. Articles suggests that rational thought requires earnest thought considering the debate or dilemma from each opposing argument, then using your own experience and logic to develop an informed opinion. Of course, considering the source of the argument supporting or denying a position is important in order to deciding how to process and weigh input from various perspectives. Credibility associated with an argument is not given, it should be earned though proof (arguable or not) and integrity of supporting logic and sources. Unfortunately, the Internet has diminished the credibility of many sources and arguments, so making an informd opinion requires more diligence than most people care to consider.

Write comment
smaller | bigger

busy
 

Share this on your social networks

Bookmark and Share

Share this

Bookmark and Share

 

Health Screening

Santa Cruz wellness expert releases app to improve workplace well-being

 

Leo Sun; Full Moon, Venus Retro in Leo; Saturn Direct

It’s a complex week of planetary movements, challenges, demands and callings. We’re in the time of the Leo Sun. Leo—fixed fire, gold, the heart, generous, strong, noble, the king/queen—needs appreciation and praise from everyone in order to move forward. During Leo we gain a greater sense of self-identification by recognizing our creativity. It’s therefore a perfect time for Venus retrograding in Leo. In Venus retrograde we review and re-assess values. Venus retro in Leo concerns our self as valuable, acknowledging talents, gifts, abilities and offerings. Friday, Venus re-enters Leo (29 degrees, a critical degree) continuing the retrograde to 14 degrees Leo on Sept. 6. Friday (Full Moon) is also the (8 degrees) Leo solar festival, Festival of the Future. Leo is the heart of the sun, the heart of all that matters. When attuned to this heart, we have understanding and inclusivity. The heart of the Lion is Mitra (think “Maitreya,” the coming World Teacher). Leo prepares humanity to receive divine love from subtle sources and later to radiate that love to the kingdoms. Sirius, Ray 2, where love originates, streams through Regulus (heart of Leo), into the heart of the sun (Ray 2) and into all hearts. The heart of Leo is Regulus. Joining Venus, the love underlying all of creation appears. Saturday is Sun/Neptune (confusion or devotion) with late night Saturn turning stationary direct. Ideas, plans and structures held long in abeyance (since March 14) slowly move forward. (Read more on Leo and the week at nightlightnews.org and Risa D’Angeles’ Facebook page, accessed through my website.)

 

The New Tech Nexus

Community leaders in science and technology unite to form web-based networking program

 

Film, Times & Events: Week of July 31

Santa Cruz area movie theaters >
Sign up for Good Times weekly newsletter
Get the latest news, events

RSS Feed Burner

 Subscribe in a reader

Latest Comments

 

Holy Cannoli

New bakery opens in Ben Lomond, plus Randall Grahm’s quest to grow 10,000 new grape varieties, and Mexican cooking classes

 

Is Santa Cruz turning into Malibu North?

It's got a ways to go before it gets wrecked like Malibu, but I think we need to be very careful about growth. Maria Mattioli, Santa Cruz, Psychotherapist

 

Bargetto Winery

A much-anticipated annual event at Bargetto Winery is the release of their very special La Vita red wine. June 7 was the day to be heralded this year, and I happily squeezed my car into their overloaded car park in eager anticipation of tasting the new La Vita nectar.

 

Margaritaville

Popular Capitola spot gets new owner and complete makeover