disjointed research questions

How do we as theatre-makers and awareness-raisers undermine our own points by making the effort to raise awareness? How can we improve the efficacy of our campaigns while sticking to our causes?

To what extent can awareness raising campaigns be effective? To what extent do they propagate misinformation simply by occurring? To what extent do we alienate people by belaboring the importance of our particular cause?

Is it responsible to attempt to inform the public about relevant issues through such easily misinterpreted forms as theatre, dance, and protest events?

Do we as theatre-makers--as opposed to lung surgeons, zoologists, cardiologists, and other specialized experts--have the right to adopt issues and attempt to publicize them?

How Liable are we when the information we spread turns out to be wrong, or if people simply get the wrong idea?

Many organizations' motives are undermined by their own mis-handling--environmental groups hand out glossy, pollution-producing leaflets and promotional materials; adult children of abusers with grudges attempt to run youth leadership camps; charities spend most of their donated revenue on advertisements to try and encourage donations, and more. How do we ensure that we're doing what we say we're doing? How do good ideas get out of hand and become messy middle-managed mass-media-marketed monstrosities? (How does HALO Trust differ in goal and scope from Climate Camp?)

We're hit in the face with this sort of attention-seeking behavior all the time, in all forms of media. To what extent do audiences pay attention? What does it take these days to get attention?

Frequently, large public displays get out of control and lead to rioting and vandalism. Some participants consider illegal behavior justified if their hearts are in the right place. Do uninvolved people agree? Is it worth it to attempt public displays if they have the potential to give our causes a bad name?