NOV 29

There's a lot more to this story than meets the eye - seems Greenpeace failed to get in touch with NCL Japan and/or someone at NCL Japan failed to return some important calls and emails - http://news.spong.com/article/14362

Not having information on something isn't the same as giving negative information. Giving Nintendo a score of zero based on a lack of information is pretty disingenuous in my book.

Looks like someone at Greenpeace had a tantrum and decided to give zeros just because Nintendo didn't bother to communicate with them.
Giving them zero is just misinformation.
If they don't know, they should admit it instead of giving a zero.

So basically Nintendo is guilty until proven innocent.

I see where you guys are coming from, but if Nintendo refuses to talk to Greenpeace, then they have no accountability in this guide. So either greenpeace had to not include them...forever...or they had to make a statement. The good news is that Greenpeace and Nintendo are now talking...which wouldn't have happened if they hadn't included Nintendo in the guide.

Maybe when the Japanese Whalers harpoon the Greenpeacenicks, will these goofballs realize ... They mean NOTHING!

I will make sure to nuy Nintendo since i do not believe in anything the greenpeace neo nazis stand for. I will make sure i burn my fireplace tonight and very night too just in case somebody can't because of their fascist political views.

The above posters are right; it looks like Greenpeace is laying into Nintendo with precious little in the way of substance, grading them mostly on their lack of green PR and general tight-lippedness. I also imagine recycling is a non-issue for many gamers by virtue of the thriving used games market (Gamestop is making money hand over fist these days). I'll grant you, though, it would be nice to get some direction from Nintendo proper on that front.

This Ars article also does a good job of examining some of the unanswered questions behind Greenpeace's headline-grabbing move: http://arstechnica.com/news.ar...ffort.html

I can't believe Greenpeace would consider a lack of information to be an automatic negative. Many businesses do not share data with organizations simply because they ask for it. Many businesses have strong non-disclosure policies in place preventing issue of data in regard to manufacturing procedures and processes. The absence of a "green proclamation" can be in no way characterized as flagrant environmental disregard (which a zero on their so-called scale would properly indicate).

As for recycling, I'd press Greenpeace to establish a bona fide need for recycling before they start screaming about it. The Wii just came out and the Game Cube hasn't been out too terribly long. I did with my Game Cube what countless others did...I passed it down to a younger brother! There's your recycling program Greenpeace! Comparing consoles to other recyclables is ignorant at best and foolish regardless.

Do us all a favor and pretend that you're all partially educated and aware that we're not going to accept a rating system you developed as gospel just because you say it is.

Then again, I've never agreed with their system to begin with so their opinion (and that's all it is) remains irrelevant to my purchases.

If a politician refused to state his position, he would be a zero in voters minds. Why does a business have to disclose anything? They don't, but if they don't, they run the risk of having people who do care about the environment rejecting their product for one made by a (literally) responsible company.

Several recent surveys show really high numbers of consumers (over 90% in some cases) saying that they prefer to buy from companies that are aware and doing something to reduce their contributions to social and environmental problems.

This is why so many companies are advertising their green credentials -- not only does it move product, but once they look into sustainable practices they often find it's more cost-effective. The less waste a company creates, the better the bottom line. Somebody paid for the waste. It's inefficient, if nothing else.

I care about the health of my family and my neighbors and their kids and our world, so it matters to me that companies do the right thing. When Nintendo or any company is not forthcoming about their environmental efforts -- especially now when businesses in every industry are jumping on the green bandwagon -- I know they aren't making an effort. Nintendo may not care, but a lot of people do.

It doesn't matter too much if one sociopathic bozo who doesn't know the meaning of the word 'fascist' wants to smoke out his neighbors to make some obscure point. The little brother argument is sweet but illogical, given a little more thought and a bigger perspective.

But one company with an attitude like some of the previous posters can do a lot of harm to a lot of people -- have done a lot of harm. Big companies have a big impact. We need them to do whatever they can to decrease the damage being done to our shared life support system.

This is not about Greenpeace. This is about extreme weather patterns, growing rates of cancer, overcrowded schools and hospitals. It's about fresh water and clean air, getting our work done without trashing the place.

The point of Greenpeace's list is to get the people who run these companies thinking about how they can contribute to the common good in their quest for the common tender.

@Terre

You do realize that credentials can be doctored an falsified, right?

I hate hippies

... just greenpeace mainly. They have always come off to me as a bit off. I know Nintendo does have some sorts of plans in place.

I agree with Terre. It’s a matter of responsibility. If a company doesn’t bother to inform the public about the product that it sells it can be ranked as irresponsible. Information is essential. I hope they give the information next time. If they simply "wash their hands" they'll lose public.

where does greenpeace stand on their own list? those anti-whaling ships out at sea don't run on rainbows and sunshine.

how about the energy used to do these little surveys? jets to japan? phone calls held on waiting... that's not free energy.


i'm not saying nintendo is clean, silicon parts to run machines, no matter how little energy they hum at in your house, still costs something to manufacture. however, scoring a commpany --especially one as private as nintendo has always been-- a zero for non-disclosure? yeah, sounds like someone at greenpeace got their panties in a twist.

i wonder, does this survey give points for things they don't even ask for? let's say that a company uses 60% wind power. but greenpeace's survey doesn't ask this question. the company they are investigating supplies that info, do they get positive points added?


if we question why nintendo isn't forthcoming, perhaps we should question what exactly is on greenpeace's surveys? i haven't seen what they ask, have you?

If sixty percent of Wal-Mart shoppers really, truly prefer to buy from greener companies and actively seek out this information, I would be truly shocked and amazed. It's hard enough to get Joe Consumer to recycle... how did you come to the conclusion that they loooooove green companiess so much?

The irony .. Apple isn't green enough and healthy! So Nokia remains on the first place in the mobile-phone world.

_____________
Marriage Family

All these greenpeace jerk do with the money donated to them is to use it to ether fuel their ships or zodiacs or to stage stupid protests proving what idiots they are only a complete dolt would have aything to do with greenpeace

I think maybe GREENPEACE should start painting a turkey rather then a dove on their ships becuase GREENPEACE are idiots