Et tu U2?

The big news around my neighborhood these days is the super secret U2 concert playing at the Somerville Theater tonight. The concert has generated a lot of buzz and it seems like nearly everyone has an opinion.

Some people are excited to have Somerville recognized with such a prestigious event. Others think the crowds and chaos are too much of a headache to be worth it. Some are optimistic the crowds will generate significant revenue for local businesses. Others are upset that tickets aren't being sold locally, but were only available through radio stations. The list goes on.

I mention this not only because I'm crazy sick and can't use my brain long enough to do anything useful, but because its got me thinking about what makes something the topic of so much talk and speculation.

What I find really interesting, though, is the way news builds on itself. Since yesterday, there have been TV crews and reporters surrounding the theater. This indicates that there must be something newsworthy going on, and with local bloggers covering the concert as well, the excitement seems to just keep building.

Sometimes I think about getting a couple of fake news crews together to stand on a street corner and pretend like something exciting is about to happen. Interview a few random passers-by and see what happens.

A lot of people complain a lot about the popularity of pop culture (please ignore the contradiction in terms there, I am very sick!). How many times have you heard people complain about "average people's" fascination with Britney Spears, Michael Jackson, that woman who just had a boat load of kids, etc etc etc when "good people" should be caring about helping starving children, ending war, improving the environment, and fixing all the other things wrong with our world?

I think about this a lot because it often seems to me like the biggest problem with social movements is that they are just not cool. Seriously, find some random person on the street and tell them you want to save the world. See how cool you feel.

This is particularly my pet peeve with anti-drug commercials - the anti-smoking commercials are brilliant because they vilify The Man, who everyone wants to rage against anyway. Anti-pot commercials, on the other hand, are just not cool. They're just not. They are so poorly done it makes me angry.

What I'm trying to say here, is that so many movements are marketed to people's intellect. They tell people what's going on, why they should care, and what they can do about it. Rational people listening to the argument will listen, learn, and act based on those arguments.

But the problem is that people aren't rational. People are all kinds of crazy and do all kinds of crazy things because they feel an irrational, emotional need to. Why did so many people buy Hummers? Why did the Prius - which looked distinctive from other cars do so much better than other Hybrids (with better mileage) that looked exactly the same as other cars? Why do I hate Quiznos? (It's because of their crazy baby commercials which haven't run for like 5 years now). Why do people buy expensive soap when the cheap soap is the exact same thing?

Marketers of products and services have known for years how to play on people's emotions, building relationships with them and working within their frame of reference. Both social movement marketers tend to stick to rational, logical arguments.

Sometime I wonder if movements should spend less time arguing why someone should care and instead go to that old high school standby - "Get invovled...all the cool kids are doing it."