I would actually agree that in terms of our theatre’s carbon footprint, the mobile phone program is a drop in the bucket (we self-publish all of our programs so yes, we do small on-demand runs on recycled paper to reduce waste). As Ecotheatre has outlined for years, this is only one way that theaters can truly make a difference. Other ways are harder for a small community theater to control, but have much more impact: energy-saving improvements to the buildings and conventional lighting we use, and reuse and recycling of building materials, props, etc which otherwise put an immense load on landfills and require all kinds of noxious manufacturing.

In practice, here’s what I’m seeing from this initiative, which has literally been in use for three days, so keep in mind there’s not much useful data to be culled yet: many people are intrigued, very few people use it. However, we are seeing a huge uptick in care of programs – those that are not saved are usually returned after that they’re being read. In addition, the program is not handed out to everyone since the choice exists – so only folks who actually want to read a program end up taking. This interaction opens the door for our company members to discuss the normal program contents – the season message, the directors notes – as part of the lobby environment. Again, this only works on a small scale, but I think it works better for everyone. We are more mentally sticky as a company, we waste less paper, and people get to read more about the theater and the show on THEIR terms – either before OR after the performance.

So: this rethinking of how a program gets presented to an audience member isn’t just about being green – it’s about raising awareness at the moment of entertainment. And that is, we feel, one of the purposes of theatre.

Re. the concerns over the ecological footprint of phones: I have read somewhere about this (mind you, not the research for which Kate beckons). I tend to agree with Travis that the ecological impact of these devices has already been inflicted and shows no signs of abating (hopefully, the design of these devices will soon become more ecologically sound) – shouldn’t we therefore put them to good use to counter-balance their evil?

Granting the ecological footprint of our mobile devices, surely you’re not arguing that program information provided for such devices is a purchase driver? If the impact has already been inflicted shouldn’t we minimize further unnecessary impact?