Frank facts Frank
February 28th, 2010
I knew Frank Luntz when he had hair. That is, I first met him when he had less hair than he has today. But all of it, such as it was, was his own. Preston Manning had engaged Luntz to do polling for the Reform Party almost 20 years ago, long before he became a political guru and regular contributor on Fox News. I don’t know what advice the party received, but at the time they needed all the help they could get, and I’m sure they got value.
Now - many years later - Mr. Luntz is presumably much richer, he’s a sought after commentator, and has some of the best hair money can buy. Currently, his biggest claim to fame is political “wordsmithing”, that is, crafting verbiage that will persuade. A self-proclaimed “word-doctor”, his website calls him “one of the most honored (~sic) communication (~sic) professionals in America today”.
Of interest to us is the fact that Mr. Luntz has put his artificially-hirsute talents at the disposal of the environmental movement, at least in terms of its epic struggle against climate. He had reportedly previously advised the Bush White House in its handling of climate politics, so this change of stripe has captivated some opponents of carbon.
Mr. Luntz apparently advises dispensing with talk of “dying polar bears”, replacing it with language like “’cleaner, healthier and safer’”. Similarly, “green jobs” should be replaced by “American jobs”. Displaying admirable pragmatism, Luntz believes that “It doesn’t matter if there is or isn’t climate change” because America needs to “develop new sources of energy that are clean reliable, efficient and safe.”
From one perspective it isn’t at all surprising that a “word-doctor” be engaged in the Canutian struggle against changing climate. The issue has been all about words for a long time. Words like “settled”, “consensus” and “denier”. Imaginative language is further applied to the U.S. Cap-and-trade bill – called the “American Clean Energy and Security Act”, and the “Clean Energy , Jobs and American Power Act” in the House and Senate respectively.
Rather than lauding the “conversion” of the man who, by his own admission, helped muddy the climate discussion under Bush 43, environmentalists might be a little suspicious. Mr. Luntz’s biz is words. His most revealing comment from the recent article was “It doesn’t matter whether you call it climate change or global warming. The public believes it’s happening, and they believe that humans are playing a part in it.” He gets dangerously close there to implying that maybe it’s not the words that matter so much, it’s the facts (unless he thinks that the public’s belief is due simply to the Green’s words being more persuasive).
For the Canutians, the unfortunate corollary to this is that, perhaps for the first time since the start of the warming/climate change tsunami, the facts have overtaken the words. After Climategate focussed attention on the data, or at least what’s left of it, it’s become almost irrelevant what neo-Orwellian rhetoric is used. The genie called “doubt” is out of the bottle and it’ll take more than clever words to get it back in.
Perhaps the scientific debate, that was precluded by the speedy consensus, will now happen after all. Or perhaps the rhetorical one-upmanship will continue. Either way, having already worked for both sides, there’s likely new hair in Mr. Luntz’s future.
Thanks to avid reader L.O. for alerting us to this one.
