Drowning in greenwash

Posted by jamie — 9 January 2008 at 4:03pm - Comments

Watching TV used to be a relaxing pleasure but now it makes my blood boil. It's not the programmes so much (although a lot of it is rubbish) but the advert breaks overflowing with greenwash, filled with images of doe-eyed creatures and tranquil woodlands by companies trying to convince me that they're really very green and, actually, always have been.

Okay, some of the claims are genuine but there's so much rubbish out there, it's no wonder a recent survey found that a third of consumers (or, in other words, the general public) think companies exaggerate their environmental credentials. Yet over half of companies think they're taking significant steps to green their business practices. Some of these are the same big, dirty companies want us to believe that, with a few cosmetic tweaks, we can all carry on, business as usual.

But companies are starting to be slapped for using misleading or downright inaccurate claims about how green they are in their publicity, and the Advertising Standards Authority has had a busy week. Boeing, which has already been criticised for claims about CO2 emissions, has had to pull a magazine advert for saying its new 787 Dreamliner aircraft can fly "60 per cent quieter than before". Meanwhile, thanks to a complaint brought by Friends of the Earth, the Malaysian Palm Oil Council can no longer show their advert extolling the sustainable virtues of their core product. Take a look, it's really quite nauseating:

On the continent, Greenpeace itself has lodged two successful complaints. Dutch energy giant Nuon has been told to stop using the phrase "clean coal", while the Swiss Oil Association had its knuckles rapped for saying, "Heating with oil: for more climate protection".

Despite all this, there's still a lot of crap. HSBC's website is dripping in images of rainforests as it holds its 'green sale' and yet we know it provides financial services to Olam International, a company that's buying timber illegally logged in the Congo rainforest. And of course, our local energy conglomerates are bending over backwards to paint themselves green. Here's E.ON's latest effort:

"Changing energy for good"? But where's the mention of their application to build the first coal-fired power station in the UK for over 30 years at Kingsnorth. And what about EDF, cynically using JFK and (gasp!) the Wombles in their 'recycled' advert? They skip over the fact that they're building nuclear power stations on the continent and want to build them here:

Urgh. I feel dirty. Watching those last two videos, it's not surprising that the utilities sector came out top when respondents to the greenwash poll mentioned above were asked who was perceived to be greener.

Imagine my joy when, in preparing this blog, I stumbled across the Greenwashing Index, where adverts can be submitted and rated according to their greenwash potential. I've already posted the palm oil advert which deserves a good drubbing.

One final piece of news which might help even the balance. Adbusters, the creative social campaigning collective, have long tried to air their own TV spots highlighting bad company practices and warning against over-consumption North America. However, companies like MTV have refused to show them with little or no explanation. Fed up with this, Adbusters are going to the Supreme Court in British Columbia to challenge Canadian broadcasters over this.

If they win, there's a chance some of the puffed-up greenwash will be challenged by an alternative point of view.

There are no new ideas, especially in advertising. And because I have special powers, here's that video in full: web editor gpuk

There are degrees of greenwashing and we've agreed elsewhere that any form of consumerism has an impact, but the system isn't going anywhere for a while. I want to change it and it would be better if it happened now rather than later; the problem is we need to persuade people that it's the right thing to do, and unless we're willing to turn ourselves over to some kind of benevolent dictatorship (which surely is an oxymoron) that takes time.

What's the alternative? I could remove myself from the rat race, live completely off what I can grow and generate somewhere in the Highlands, but that's probably one of the more selfish things I could do. I'd be lessening my own impact but I wouldn't be in a position to persuade anyone else to join me. Meanwhile the environmental destruction and mass extinctions would go on regardless.

I think it's better to be here (not at Greenpeace as such, but in modern society), acknowledge that I everything I do has impacts, do what I can to lessen it while I work with others to convince everyone else to do likewise.

web editor
gpuk

Fiona - talking of 'the system', I've just read this piece on the BBC which you might find interesting, and I'd also recommend George Monbiot's The Age of Consent (although it's a while since I read it so don't quiz me on the fine points!).

web editor
gpuk

I'd rather have a world where there is a balance and we as a civilisation are not exploiting the planet as we are now, managing resources properly etc etc but you're probably right that we have differing definitions to one degree or another. But if you could wave a magic wand, what kind of society or world would you like to live in? I'm interested to find out as, from what you've said, I thought you were hankering for a return to an agrarian life before we started inventing things more complicated than knives and wheels (that's why I mentioned about dropping out and living in a shack) but maybe my assumptions are wrong... ;)

Thanks for the reading tip - I'll add to my ever-growing list of tomes to plough through. Incidentally, this discussion reminds me of something a colleague from our China office said: that Westerners are always trying to change things, whereas the Chinese approach is to achieve a balance. Not sure if it's relevant or not, but it's nice in a profound kind of way.

web editor
gpuk

There are no new ideas, especially in advertising. And because I have special powers, here's that video in full: web editor gpuk

There are degrees of greenwashing and we've agreed elsewhere that any form of consumerism has an impact, but the system isn't going anywhere for a while. I want to change it and it would be better if it happened now rather than later; the problem is we need to persuade people that it's the right thing to do, and unless we're willing to turn ourselves over to some kind of benevolent dictatorship (which surely is an oxymoron) that takes time. What's the alternative? I could remove myself from the rat race, live completely off what I can grow and generate somewhere in the Highlands, but that's probably one of the more selfish things I could do. I'd be lessening my own impact but I wouldn't be in a position to persuade anyone else to join me. Meanwhile the environmental destruction and mass extinctions would go on regardless. I think it's better to be here (not at Greenpeace as such, but in modern society), acknowledge that I everything I do has impacts, do what I can to lessen it while I work with others to convince everyone else to do likewise. web editor gpuk

Fiona - talking of 'the system', I've just read this piece on the BBC which you might find interesting, and I'd also recommend George Monbiot's The Age of Consent (although it's a while since I read it so don't quiz me on the fine points!). web editor gpuk

I'd rather have a world where there is a balance and we as a civilisation are not exploiting the planet as we are now, managing resources properly etc etc but you're probably right that we have differing definitions to one degree or another. But if you could wave a magic wand, what kind of society or world would you like to live in? I'm interested to find out as, from what you've said, I thought you were hankering for a return to an agrarian life before we started inventing things more complicated than knives and wheels (that's why I mentioned about dropping out and living in a shack) but maybe my assumptions are wrong... ;) Thanks for the reading tip - I'll add to my ever-growing list of tomes to plough through. Incidentally, this discussion reminds me of something a colleague from our China office said: that Westerners are always trying to change things, whereas the Chinese approach is to achieve a balance. Not sure if it's relevant or not, but it's nice in a profound kind of way. web editor gpuk

About Jamie

I'm a forests campaigner working mainly on Indonesia. My personal mumblings can be found @shrinkydinky.

Follow Greenpeace UK