Recent Comment
Share
Greenwash: To improve the public image of a corporation by funding environmental initiatives and public relations.
Here and now, EcoGeek asks an uncomfortable question: Is greenwashing a bad thing? When BP changed their name to Beyond Petroleum and began to spend twice as much money than any other energy company on renewables should we call them greenwashers and disparage their progress, or should we thank them. There is no doubt that public relations spurred BP in its rebranding. And, yes, the company still does awful dirty things (especially in Alaska) but we at EcoGeek are strong believers in the principle of multiple causes.
To say BP overhauled their brand, their mission and restructured their entire corporation solely for public relations is far too simple-minded. Greenwashing has multiple causes. Among them are public relations, long-term and short-term economics and concern for the environment. That's right, I said it, Concern for the environment. As much as the corporate world seems cash-crazed and heartless, there are still people running these things. And, occasionally, people care.
Wal-Mart just went through a green-up with pep-talks from Al Gore and audits from the Rocky Mountain Institute. This is the kind of thing that will make some folks hop up and down and scream "Greenwashers!" But, the truth is, when Wal-Mart puts compact fluorescent lightbulbs on sale, the world notices. They're doing it because it's making them money, it's saving them money, it's increasing brand loyalty and, maybe, because the Waltons come from a long line of traditional (hook and bullet) conservationists.
When call Wal-Mart and BP greenwashers, we punish them for doing the right things. When they're guilty, which they often are, we need to rub their faces in it. But when they change the way their companies operate and, thus, change the world, we have to say thanks. We have to shake their hands and print their press releases because, otherwise, they'll have one less reason to green-up. And we want them to have as many reasons as possible.
Subscribe to this comment's feed
written by a guest, August 17, 2006
-
- +0
-
-
written by a guest, August 17, 2006
Wal-mart talking about going green is making headlines and fueling dialogue of all kinds.. positive, negative, and somewhere in between. It is raising awareness- not only about Wal-Marts new "green" business plan, but about how things are done now, how they treat their employees etc. I feel this is a good thing. I think having a negative attitude about Wal-Mart's greening is like throwing the baby out with the bathwater. We should applaud them for their new efforts while continuing to constructively critique the other, less responsible or ethical areas of their business. If we offer no reward, no positive support, then there will be little reason for other companies to follow suit.
-
- +1
-
-
written by a guest, August 18, 2006
-
- +0
-
-
written by a guest, August 27, 2006
To me, greenwashing is about lip service, or for example, the creation of bogus environmental groups -- particularly those with names which would appear to be grassroots organizations. I think it goes along with misleading public relations in general.
There is a big difference between greenwashing and legitimate environmental projects. And it is absolutely critical that we know the difference:
Reward those with genuine contributions; expose those without.
-
- +0
-
-
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
I have staunchly refused to purchase anything from Wal-Mart for years, even if they are the only store in town with the item I need. The only green they care about are the bills in your wallet.