Since the first edition of Rachel Carson's Silent Spring was published in 1962, more than six million copies have been sold, and the book has been translated into thirty languages. In 2006, Discover magazine named it one of the twenty-five most important science books of all time. Perhaps even more amazing is that the American Chemical Society, the world's largest organization of professional scientists, has in recent years recognized Carson's "scientific perspective and rigor," calling Silent Spring "a work of substantial depth and credibility" and claiming that Carson's work "sparked widespread debate within the scientific community" about the value of pesticides. When the book was first published, though, the nation's professional chemists had quite a different reaction.
In 1963, a year after Silent Spring was published, the television network CBS aired a special program on the controversy stirred up by Carson's book, which already seemed to be achieving its intended effect—raising alarm about the impact of pesticides on ecological systems. Makers of pesticides responded with their own campaign. Eager to oppose Carson's claims, the chemical industry sent a spokesman to CBS to argue its case for the value of pesticides to human life. This brief segment from the beginning of the newscast provides an introduction that sets up the debate.
What approach did the producers of this television program use to introduce the controversy over pesticides? Did you notice the language that each speaker used to describe the problem as he or she saw it? See if you can recall who used each of the words below. Drag each word to the box where it belongs.
Rachel Carson
Dr. White-Stevens
- sinister
- non-selective
- deadly
- distortions
- absurd
- hordes
- linger
- barrage
- poisons
- ravage
- scourges
- vermin
Complete
Question
What tone did each speaker—Carson and White-Stevens—attempt to create through his or her word choice?
Carson's words encouraged listeners to view the use of pesticides as extremely dangerous—almost evil, and their effects as potentially catastrophic. White-Stevens tried to undermine Carson's claims as non-scientific and potentially harmful because they might lead humans to welcome plagues of insects on a Biblical scale.
