Scare Tactics

Recently, I've been going to events and handing out mercury fish advisories and additional information on how mercury (mainly from coal-fired power plants) is contaminating our waterways and our fish. I've noticed that as people approach our table and scan the fish advisory, one of two things happens: either they are glad to see us giving out information on the issue since it is also of concern to them, or they are shocked and disturbed to learn of the high levels of mercury found in fish in North Carolina. The latter reaction, while fruitful in discerning that the advisories are starting to hit home, always disturbs me a bit--while I do want the mercury information to impact the people visiting our table, I don't want to actually scare them, nor do I want them to perceive I am trying to scare them. I just want to jolt them into action and understanding...there is a difference after all.

Other organizations often accuse environmentalists of using scare tactics to push our agenda. But at what point does stating facts and alerting citizens become a "scare tactic?" How can we as environmentalists provide important, science-based, yet often hard-to-hear information without being seen as "fish scammers," for instance? Do ordinary citizens believe we want to scare everyone or is that just a view held up by anti-environmentalists?