Nuclear energy debate: it’s in the angle

An organisation called Forum Nucleaire, made up of a number of  companies that invest in nuclear energy, has launched a campaign aimed at kick-starting a debate on nuclear energy in Belgium. They’ve ticked a lot of boxes in terms of good campaign practice:

• A good website which presents content clearly and which seeks to answer people’s questions rather than showcase a position.
• Good integration of online and offline communications: the posters around Brussels and the TV ad (can be seen on site too) are engaging, on message, and it’s easy to see that they form part of the same campaign.

The best thing about the campaign is the angle though. They are not presenting an overt position, which in their case could be (and usually has been): “nuclear is cheap, nuclear is clean, nuclear is not dangerous if safety standards are adhered to, oil is a lot worse, we rely on Middle-East or Russian oil, and in any case – it’s running out.”

Instead, they highlight that the debate is a complex one and acknowledge that there are good arguments on both sides. By doing so, they are hoping that people will want to learn more and make an informed decision on whether they support nuclear energy or not, instead of agreeing with the hype, which tends to be anti-nuclear.

This a smart approach for an industry which the average person traditionally opposes. It gains goodwill by opening up and admitting that there’s a viable position which does not necessarily support its commercial interests; and by seeking to raise the level of debate so that it is more rational, fact-based and scientific rather than emotional, it’s likely that it’ll have a better chance of winning public support in the long-run.

The website could be bit more interactive though, there should be more 3rd party endorsements, and I think there’s good scope for bringing in external content, especially from bloggers – but maybe that’s coming next. I’ll be keeping a look-out.