•
Rating: How much does a CD cost in terms of environmental impact?
Let's see: there's the paper of the booklet, the plastic of the case and the CD itself, the plastic film that wraps it, and then the manufacturing process, engraving, packaging, boxing, transport. Oh, the store bag. Multiplied by X million copies, all this stuff has a cost in terms of the environment, doesn't it?
I think the Live Earth operation would have been better identified with the aim of raising awareness about the disasters caused by (never proven) global warming and blah blah blah simply by putting singers on a stage, or better yet, connecting them via videoconference comfortably from their homes and having them say in unison: from now on we will no longer produce music on CDs but only in mp3. If you download from my website for 1 euro (symbolic example), half the proceeds go to social causes (so I also stop going to Africa to clown around, as every time I go, a civil war breaks out), the rest I snort up in coke.
Ten minutes of zero-impact broadcast. End, we would all have been much more sensitized compared to another (yet another) charade that doesn't make any difference to the problem. If anything, it aggravates it.
In my small way, I do recycling, hold onto my cigarette butts until I find a bin, and use the car only when necessary. But I don't feel like a hero, I just consider it common sense. Taking common sense to extremes by overturning it, as in this horrible media event, catapults us back thousands of years, to the darkest Middle Ages, to the apocalyptic cries for the thousand no longer thousand, to the spiritual devastation in the form of blackmail once carried out by fanatical religious figures in the pay of the Church, today by Madonna and associates in the pay of multinationals.
Faced with the disinformation spread by Live Earth, as well as by Gore's films, newspapers that don't filter news, and TV paid by the automotive, pharmaceutical, or energy industries, we are helpless: if the environment is becoming the cash cow of the next 50 years, someone should explain it to us. And for fairness, faced with those peddling lies about climate change to forcibly alter my way of life with guilt, there should be someone else saying the opposite.
If today's information is this one-way street to a dead end, then I would pay for it with the 8 per thousand, but even with the thousand per thousand the professional institutional disinformer, who after a Rocchetta water commercial that makes you cool says: attention, you have listened to a series of huge nonsense, the best water is the one closest to your home, and if you drink it in glass, it's better: glass does not affect the organoleptic quality of the product, you reuse it a thousand times, and then you give it back.
Or the one who after the Nokia ad, the monkey plasma TV, and the Panda-killing SUV, tells me that the cheapest mobile phone, the best TV of all, the coolest car of all is the one you already have.
Or the one who after the Eni commercial that dishes out the decalogue for saving energy tells me: you have heard a lot of corporate nonsense, read this site to cut your household consumption and make money with the energy you have self-produced.
Or the one who after the hilarious Prestitò commercial tells me clearly and straightforwardly: the contract terms are at usurious rates, don't incur further debt for trivial matters, and if you really can't make it, turn to ethical banks (damn, there are even those!).
If Raid kills mosquitoes, but the can used and not disposed of properly devastates a micro-ecosystem for 100 years, then someone should explain to me during prime time and without hurry that to keep mosquitoes away, just a few zero-impact tricks like mosquito nets, geraniums, onions, and vinegar in a dish with water are enough, and such common-sense bullshit that no one has the guts to explain anymore.
Common sense saves lives, information saves lives. Live Earth does not.
Loading comments slowly
