Go Michael Phelps.

If Greenwashing were baseball, Royal Dutch Shell would be on the verge of striking out. Twice in less than a year the company has been called on the carpet for misleading eco-advertising, commonly called greenwashing. The first, and don’t ask me how they thought this wasn’t going to make sense to anyone, showed an oil refinery with flowers spewing from the stacks. Nice.

That ad was brought to the attention of the U.K.’s Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) by the nonprofit organization Friends of the Earth. The nonprofit group challenged Shell’s claim that it used carbon dioxide emissions to grow flowers – just when you thought you’d heard it all, right. For its’ part, Shell said that an estimated 320,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide was scheduled to ship to greenhouse growers this year. Nice gesture but Friends of the Earth argued that amount represented only .325 per cent of the company’s carbon emissions.

I don’t know the chemistry, biology or whatever is involved in this kind of a deal but it sure sounds like a good thing – why they wouldn’t ship more to greenhouses is beyond me.

Anyways, the ASA ruled that in the absence of qualification the TV ads were misleading and Shell agreed to pull the ad in June of 2007. (Reuters UK)

In a ruling published today, the ASA took issue with Shell’s claims in this print ad that by building what would be the U.S.A.’s largest refinery, and tapping into the Canadian oil sands deposits is somehow environmentally responsible. Yeah, I can see how they would think that would make sense - more oil refineries. Now that is a real sustainable, innovative solution to the energy crisis.

The text of the ad reads -

“The challenge of the 21st century is to meet the growing need for energy in ways that are not only profitable but sustainable. As our 2007 results show, we’re investing heavily in new technology and assets to safeguard the interests of our shareholders and future generations. In Canada we’re harnessing our global network of technical and financial expertise to unlock the potential of the vast Canadian oil sands deposit. In the USA we’re helping to build what will be the nation’s largest refinery. And we’re exploring a new generation of biofuels made from non-food sources. Difficult yes, impossible no”

Difficult to believe, yes. Impossible, yes.

What we ought to be asking is who in the world is making these ads for them and how come nobody pushed the panic button when they saw an ad with flowers coming out of a refinery stack?

http://www.sattlerclothing.com

Earth Day.

“It’s nearly Earth Day: Time to consume more to save the planet” was how a recent article began in Advertising Age. This year millions of dollars are being poured into Earth Day marketing efforts to reach the “green” consumer. The one-day event started in 1970 seems to have become another flurry of promos and specials akin to Thanksgiving and Christmas with the sound of John Lennon singing over the mall speakers “And so this is Christmas Earth Day…and what have you done..”

“This month I’ve definitely seen a lot of companies that I never would have associated with green popping up,”said Steven Addis, CEO of Addis Creson, a branding firm. “Companies are saying, ‘We need something to green ourselves up, so let’s sponsor Earth Day.’…It’s really now in this hype curve, and hopefully we’re getting toward the top, so we can start having some fallout.”

Some Earth Day promos out there –

- Newsweek subscribers can turn the cover of their April 14 issue into an envelop and send plastic bags to Target in exchange for a reusable tote bag.

- Wal-Mart is running seven national 30-second spots promoting products from t-shirts made of recycled bottles to organic coffee with the tagline “Budget-friendly prices. Earth-friendly products.”

- Banana Republic is donating 1% of sales between April 22 – April 27 benefit the Trust for Public Land.

- Macy’s is offering 10% to 20% off most merchandise to consumers that make a $5 donation to the National Park Foundation.

Steve Addis says “It’s great that people are paying attention…” however, “I call it the 95-5 rule. Five percent of somebody’s business is green, but 95% of their PR is green.”

Are all of these Earth Day promos evil? When Earth Day is made into an EVENT, a one-day thing full of door-busters and loss-leaders to get consumers to buy more, - Yes. Campaigns designed to catalyst more sustainable living or an eco-friendly lifestyle and are not focused on fattening a company’s own wallet will resonate with consumers. The Target and Newsweek campaign I think is a good example.

Ken Rother, president-chief operating officer of TreeHugger admits that “There are some companies that are still feeling their way around and probably greenwashing to some extent” but suggests that “this is the problem of our times, but anything that raises awareness is good.”

Well… - sustainable operations and products breed a sustainable business. Consumers take note and are attracted to authentic sustainability. (Green Companies Attract Customers – read here) So beyond just trying to sell more do yourself, and the Earth, a favor and begin a serious effort to be a more eco-friendly business and living a more sustainable lifestyle.

Either way – it’s still Earth Day. What are you doing to celebrate Earth Day and what do you think of all the Earth Day promos?

Hewlett-Packard’s new Chief Marketing Officer may be seeing green. Michael Mendenhall, in an interview with Advertising Age, mentioned that the computer giant recently brought in an ad agency that may have the role of helping HP communicate its eco-friendliness to consumers.

Although Mr. Mendenhall, coming from a 17-year stint at Walt Disney Co. Parks and Resorts, made no comment as to what the new agency will be doing he did make some comments at a conference sponsored by the Economist that might give us some insight. At that conference Mr. Mendenhall made mention of some of the hottest trends in marketing, one of which was sustainability and suggested that a company could not simply call itself “green” or “eco-friendly” simply because they buy carbon credits.

Before we go any further we’ll have to add that it is nice hear that a person in a marketing position agrees that greenwashing by simply throwing money to a carbon credit company does not equal sustainability. It may make you feel better about dumping toxins into the environment but it is not sustainability – it is the developed world sluffing sustainability off to the peripheral economies of the world. And frankly, if you are in a position to lead the “greenification” of your company buying carbon credits should never be on your list of strategies. It is not a long term strategy and will fail to generate any of the cost-savings or increased profitability that often accompanies those that are successful at executing authentic sustainability efforts.

Jacquelyn A. Ottman, an advisor at Sustainable Life Media suggests that many companies try to tout their green processes but that it would be far more productive to put products in the spotlight. She points to campaigns such as BP’s Beyond Petroleum and GE’s Ecomagination. Each of these campaigns, she argues, “demonstrate the power of a product-centered campaign to help position a company as socially responsible, a progressive leader, and an innovator.
Ottman continues by providing some strategy direction for companies -
“When you are strategizing for your company’s green campaign, keep in mind that:

-Products and their marketing are highly visible to the public. Evidence of eco-innovative products can ignite enthusiasm and commitment of the public, media, employees, investors and shareholders

-An estimated 75% of the impact a product throws off during its lifetime is determined at the design stage; read: it is in the purview of the business that develops it. Sometimes that impact can span several generations

-Polls show that Americans express their concern for the environment primarily through their product-related behavior - looking for eco-labels, turning lights off, or recycling at the curb - and less so, writing letters to congressmen or donating to environmental causes

So ensure that consumers will resonate with your organization’s efforts by helping them see true environmental benefits in the products or services you purvey. As part of this, empower them to consumer your product responsibly - show them how to reduce the consumption of natural resources during use by providing feedback, such as Toyota does with the fuel mileage meter that’s onboard every Prius, or making it easy for them to recycle products at the end of their life.”

Interesting insight as long as it is not interpreted as “Sell eco-friendly products rather than being energy star rated”. I don’t think that is what she is saying. The casual green consumer is most attracted to products but the more dedicated green consumer, I think, does take into consideration the operations of a company when looking to spend some money. I think that her strongest point is that consumers can really get excited about cool eco-products. Like the solar roof tiles, handheld wind turbines, or eco-friendly pesticides. The best way to start a move to more eco-friendly products and processes is with your product development team and supply chain people - not with marketing.

Eco-Friendly & Fair Labor Clothing
http://www.sattlerclothing.com 

It didn’t start out as a focus on green. It started out as a health-and-wellness push ( what CPG company DIDN’T do a health-and-wellness push last year?) that morphed into some kind of “sustainable well-being”. Coke is hoping to S - T - R - E - T - C - H the meaning of “sustainability” into something that is less about being green and more about filling your needs as a consumer.

“We’re thinking of well-being from a mental, physical, community and environmental perspective that encompasses every part of our North American business,” a Coca-Cola spokeswoman said. The new campaign will launch this week with ads in the New York Times, USA Today and the Wall Street Journal. The 3 page spread will focus on how Coke products have evolved over the years to fill the needs of its North American consumers. According to the spokeswoman quoted on AdAge “Our own consumers were saying, ‘Where are you in this [sustainability] space?’”

The newspaper spread will be followed by a commercial during American Idol this Thursday with another TV ad to be aired sometime during the Smoglympics this summer. Personally, don’t really get it. Does it address Coke’s “greenness”? Not really. If you go to the website that they include in the print ad there is some material addressing the environment and Corporate Social Responsibility. Interesting, blurry campaign. If you want to connect on the basis of being green then tell and show us that. If you want to tell us that “Like a good neighbor, COKE is there” - then tell us that.

Coke’s Green Street Cred’s

The $10 million campaign hopes to build some green street cred for the company looking to jump on the bandwagon of concepts surrounding green and sustainability. Coke company spokeswoman points to its promise to recycle 100% of its aluminum cans sold in the U.S. and its financial support of construction of the world’s largest bottle-to-bottle recycling plant in Spartanburg, S.C.

Illustration: Marc Simon accessed via AdAge article

There has been a lot of talk lately about ‘greenwashing’ or the current trend in advertising to make something appear ‘green’ or eco-friendly that in reality – isn’t. Enter the green police.

An article by Tom Wright in the WSJ today, tells of an ad by the Malaysian Palm Oil Council depicting a man running through a natural rain forest interspersed with shots of palm-oil plantations and wildlife with a voice-over that says “Malaysia palm oil. Its trees give life and help our planet breathe.”

The United Kingdom’s Advertising Standards Authority didn’t buy it and determined that a product that is derived from plants that are often planted in illegally cleared natural rain forests or in plantations that destroy the natural habitat of species like the Sumatran elephant, isn’t really green. The U.K. authority ruled that -

“The ad was likely to mislead viewers as to the environmental benefits of oil-palm plantations, compared with native rain forest,”

Officials in Norway made a similar ruling on automakers labeling their vehicles as ‘green’ and banned all car ads from alluding that their vehicles are “green”, “clean”, or “environmentally friendly”. The officials expressed the opinion that all car production leads to more, not fewer carbon emissions.

Even the U.S. Federal Trade Commission, the body that oversees advertising claims, began hearings this month to establish guidelines for appropriate green marketing in an effort to update its 10 year old advertising guidelines for eco-friendly marketing.

Even though much of the damage is done before the green police show up and false advertisers get nothing more than a good hand-slapping, it is progress and possibly the best we can ask for right now. What do you think? Is there a better way to regulate false green claims?