[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: 1978 EPA Report
In a message dated 97-06-07 16:33:28 EDT, Eric writes:
<< > For political reasons, I think we should use the
> word addiction. It dramatizes the issue, and can
> also mobilize support from counselors, researchers
> and others who relate professionally to addictions.
For our purposes, you are right. >>
As a political strategy, calling it an addiction has
other advantages. The analogy to the smoking
situtation is always irresistable. Before the anti-
smoking campaign, it was far easier to hook
adolescents with the idea that smoking was sexy
and prestigious. Now many of these have rejected
this notion, and many smokers understand that
they are addicts in need of help. This puts them
on the defensive.
Currently, many seek profit and/or prestige through
noise-making. Rock band members pursue the
image of glamour associated with their activities.
The pubic needs to know that what they are really
doing is conducting routine violent assaults on the
inner ear, while they nourish their addiction to
ego-expansion and attention.
Boom car drivers also seek prestige in their peer
community by bragging about how loud their sound
systems are, and by continually calling attention
to themselves as they drive down the street.
Noise-makers need to have the prestige associated
with what they are doing stripped away. Their
stature can be considerably diminished by labelling
them as addicts who are harming others while
feeding their addiction.
-- Michael Wright
QUIET-LIST: Internet Mail List and Forum for discussion of Noise Pollution,
Soundscape Awareness, and the Right to Quiet. Email: "email@example.com"
To subscribe, email "firstname.lastname@example.org" with message "subscribe quiet-list".
For info, send message "info quiet-list" to same.
Date Index |