Shutting down opinions is never a good way to persuade people

Editorial: The Extinction Rebellion blockade of newspaper printers was a counterproductive way to secure more effective action on the climate emergency

Protesters delayed distribution of several titles this weekend (XR)

Extinction Rebellion, the movement demanding urgent action to deal with the climate emergency, has succeeded in gaining attention. The nation woke yesterday to headlines about the group’s blockade of newspaper printers, which delayed the distribution of The Sun, The Times, the Daily Mail, The Daily Telegraph and the Financial Times.

But did this change a single mind? Did it win over any doubters to the cause? Or will it have damaged the reputation of Extinction Rebellion (XR), as it attempted to shut down the free press?

No more poignant an answer to this rhetorical question could be offered than an interview in The Sun with Sir David Attenborough in which he appeals to readers to do more to tackle the environmental crisis – an interview that some Sun readers will not see because of Extinction Rebellion’s action.

The Independent shares the sense of urgency and commitment that the climate crisis demands. And our view of events has often differed from those at many of Britain’s biggest news titles – just look at our coverage of Brexit, the Iraq War, or indeed the climate crisis. We have worked for decades to raise awareness of the dire effects of burning fossil fuels, and have long advocated radical policies to achieve global carbon net zero. So we applaud new and unconventional ways of communicating this important message.

And we accept that mistakes will be made. It did nothing for the cause last year, for example, to prevent workers, many of them low paid, from using the Docklands Light Railway in London; public transport is not a carbon villain.

Nonetheless, the blockade of newspapers is another error. Shutting down opinions is not the right way to win an argument.

It makes no sense to blame printed newspapers for the failure of the British people and their elected governments to take more effective climate action. They are, to be brutal, a small part of the media ecosystem, and they rely on a fragile business model, which is under long-term threat from technological change and short-term pressures from coronavirus restrictions.

If XR sets itself against journalists, or something it sees as “the mainstream media”, it will prepare for marginalisation and failure. Any organisation that seeks to influence public opinion in a democracy has to work with journalists. Most media organisations – indeed most political parties, businesses and civic institutions – are committed to some basic level of environmental responsibility, including targets for net-zero carbon. The way to persuade them to go further and faster is respectful debate and hard work, not confrontation. Work with the more like-minded titles in the media, amplify the message, but don’t blockade those who disagree.

Jo Stevens, the shadow culture, media and sport secretary, spoke for the opposition yesterday: “A free press is vital for our democracy. People have the right to read the newspapers they want. Stopping them from being distributed and printers from doing their jobs is wrong.” That stunt has obviously and rightly failed to persuade any parties that are likely to form a government.

XR has won itself acres of commentary with its action this weekend, but it must use the attention it has gained constructively if it is to make any positive difference to the cause to which it is so justly committed.