(Person) Percentage - Sabanci University Research Database

The Asian Media & Mass Communication Conference 2010 Osaka, Japan
In this last part, the contribution of NTV Green Screen on engineering works for
environmental issues was investigated on the example program Mr.Green, which had the most
contribution.
Mr Green focuses on problemmatic issues and demand the contribution of the local public for
the problemmatic works with “call us” approach. In an example progam he tackled an
industry who cause serius environmental pollution near a small town. Its main pollutants were
wastewater and dust. Wastewater was discharged to the stream near the town possibly without
treatment. The stream water became turbid, colored, fish population decreased and
photosynthetic organisms unable to survive. The dust was caused by the raw material carried
by trucks and in the site continuously moved to the production assembly. It is carried by the
wind and accumulate on the soil and leaves. Thus affecting the agriculture and planting
adversely.
If this pollution had been determined by an engineer, what can he/she be do were limited.
a)If the engineer works for a related ministry or other governmetal organization, he/she can
visit the industry but face with many obstructions and/or threats. He/she can report his
observations within the limits of legislation. The sanctions are to be applied by higher
authorities in the organization and they may not be rigid enough indicating the national
economy and profits as reason.
b)If the engineer is from the local public, his ability is more desparate. He/she is not allowed
to approach close to the site. Two alternatives he/she can do: apply to related governmental
organization, which will result in the above case, or apply to the court, which is costly and
non-guarenteed procedure taking possibly a long time. By the help of programs like Mr Green,
this engineer may be the person who “called” the programmer. This opportunity has the
possibility to reach a solution discussed below.
c)The engineer, especially if he/she is an environmental engineer, his/her no chance to come
together with the industrial authorities in goodwill and produce the solution.
d)If the engineer is already working for the industry, he/she point out the hazards and solution
alternatives depending on professional ethics. But the decision-maker is always the invester.
Therefore the engineer has nothing to do unless he/she is the invester himself/herself.
When such a situation is subjected in the program, what happens, how the situation changes?
The industry may gladly accept the programmers with the aim of advertising. There will be no
problem as the program involve the positive aspects of the industry. When the pollution is
mentioned, the authorized person of the industry will first reject and say “that pollution is not
caused by us”. If the programmer advocate that the pollution is observed by him, the industry
will still reject. This is the point where engineers contribute the programmers in
environmental issues. That’s why Mr Green involve the engineers and scientists among the
interested parties. Because the objection of the true and scientific knowledge of technical
people by industry will be meaningless and the industry will have to accept its pollution
problem.
At this point the problem in the program was ended via one of the three alternatives:
1)The industry understands the dead-end and acts with the “best defense is attack” approach,
become aggressive and argues with the programmers and other participants.
2)The industry accepts the pollution but defends himself with its compatibility with the
legislation, tries to transfer the responsibility to legal deficiencies. Industries in developing
and underdeveloped countries often try to hide behind this excuse.
480