Brand Republic
 
Edition:
UK |
Asia
 
Digital jobs

Jobs

 

Directory

 

Greenwash Awards 

Comments:4   Add your comment

This time of year is full of awards. Everyone likes to win something. Unless it’s one for greenwashing.

Now all those brands that have decided to risk a bit of green spin to make themselves look good can now look bad and win an award for it.

Though no doubt winners will be spinning even this. Abusers will be saying how its green ad is an award winner.

If you pop into the Friends of the Earth website or SpinWatch you can cast your vote in the Worst GreenWash Awards - http://www.worstlobby.eu/2007/

Far from walking up to the stage glowing with pride green spin doctors can now walk up, head bowed, glowing red with embarrassment.

 “And the award for claiming to be green on the smallest fact is…”

Well you have to see. My bet (and my vote) goes to Shell for its ad ‘DON’T THROW ANYTHING AWAY, BECAUSE THERE IS NO AWAY’.  Maybe the ad should have been thrown away before it ran.

It’s a nice ad. Nice creative. Great line. Very Austin Powers. Lovely illustration of an oil refinery pumping out flowers. Quite cute really.

But it’s claim that the waste CO2 is being used to grow flowers is a little…well…exaggerated. If only 50% was used that’d probably be ok. If it was 20% it’d certainly be spin, but 0.325%! Come on guys, that’s like claiming I won a gold D&AD pencil because I bought the annual and own a biro.

No wonder the ASA and even the Dutch banned it.

Other brands that are short listed include Airbus, BAE Systems and Exxon Mobile.

Airbus want us to think airplanes are green and clean by showing jet silhouettes are filled with beautiful landscapes. D’oh! They aren’t. Not even a little. Maybe you should stick to comfy seats, nice food and pretty girls in your ads, it works for BA.

BAE Systems are promoting deadly weapons as environmentally friendly. Well I guess helping dictators remove ugly buildings and towns and returning them back to nature could be seen as environmental. These guys have actually put less lead in their weapons so they don’t pollute as much when they explode. Wow, a caring weapons company, sorry, defense company. Words are so important these days if you want a greener image.

Exxon Mobil has been claiming it’s reducing its greenhouse gas emissions. Now that’s not spin. They haven’t even reduced it by 0.325%. In reality its emissions are increasing. No doubt they are using the most common green spin technique of the moment – the false promise energy companies so love; “We plan (but probably will never actually do it) to reduce our carbon emissions by 2020 (cause by then we hope none of us will be working here and will have retired with a fat pension).”

One contended for next year must be poor old BOSCH. Alas, a company that produces great products with customer service second to none has fallen fowl of the ASA by claiming its dishwashers use less water than hand washing. It pays to get good advice; evidently their agency service didn’t included checking out the facts.

Probably all the major energy companies will be fighting over who has made the most unbelievable green claims about how they are helping the environment, investing in wind farms and using green electricity.

If you want to vote you have until November 24th.

If you want to spill the green beans on any greenwash briefs you have or on ads you’ve seen, just visit www.spinwatch.org. Who knows, your campaign may be picking up a gong next year too.

Comments

November 15, 2007 11:13 AM
 
While there's a place for GreenwashWatch, wouldn't these organisations achieve more if they devoted their energy and funding into persuading companies that are doing nothing at all about the environment? And, you know, by this I mean the thousands of SMEs out there, many of whom could change without having to resort to greenwash. The likes of Shell, BAE and Exxon do greenwash because they're big and under a constant spotlight. It's obvious it's greenwash. It's time to turn the light on medium and smaller businesses, who, together, produce more environmental impact than these big leviathans. So, while I won't forget the need to observe Shell et al, I won't be taking part in spinwatch. I'll just be getting on with encouraging smaller organisations to reduce their environmental impact.
 
 
by S C
November 15, 2007 2:45 PM
 
Not sure I agree Mark. They're all important courses of action, but there's little more corrosive than big business co-opting the increasing awareness of green issues among the public, and channeling it into deceptions that actually only cause more destruction. All hail SpinWatch and the subvertisers who are exposing this for what it is.
 
 
November 15, 2007 3:13 PM
 
Re: One contended for next year must be poor old BOSCH - claiming its dishwashers use less water than hand washing. Just a question really, though it does lead to often competing aspects of 'green'. I can kind of see the water argument, though with a missus like mine to do the glasses, then the plates and then the pots we're talking at least 3 bowls' worth. I wonder how many litres a cycle actually takes? Though this was not a factor and BOSCH and its agency can live with their choices of claim accordingly, does anyone know what the received opinion is on energy use? It was my understanding that in many circumstances a machine could be better in terms of overall enviROI. In our climate I would trade water 'use' for energy in order of priority, at least in terms of greenhouse gas emissions. These are the kind of choices we the consumer are going to be faced with, and it would be good to know that those who would tell us, commercial or public service, for sale or for information, are talking from a common hymn book... which itself can be relied upon.
 
 
November 16, 2007 11:08 AM
 
The questions of dishwashers vs hand washing is a good one. BOSCH, didn't manage to convince the ASA. In time maybe it'll turn out BOSCH's facts were right. One of the complicated issues at the moment, and one facing bodies like the ASA, is what is fact and fiction and what is more right than another right? Many facts are muddled in with myths and dubious research. Add to that the politics of ethics, highlighted by fair trade vs carbon footprint. Which comes first poverty or planet? There are also official bodies that are getting some of their facts wrong but due to their status hold weight.
 
To comment on this post you have to be logged in

About this blog

Arnold on ethical marketing

Ethics is the fastest growing area of marketing. From green campaigns to greenwash. It's hot. It's complicated. And most companies get it wrong.
 

About the author

CHRIS ARNOLD

Blogging for:

Arnold on ethical marketing

Member since: 03 Jun 2008

Last login: 19 Nov 2009

Total Posts: 313

 
 
 
 

Tags

 

Syndication