Archive for the 'greenwashing' Category
Thursday, January 26th, 2012
Archdruid of Ideology
Back in April, I said “there’s no way John Michael Greer has read Karl Marx.”
That’s confirmed today, as the Archdruid writes this howler:
Marxism reached its high-water point in the 1950s and then receded, as the golden promises of Das Kapital gave way to gray bureaucratic inefficiency and, in time, total systemic failure.
ROFL. What “golden promises” would those be? Anybody who had actually read Capital would be well aware of the fact that it contains exactly zero promises of any kind. Seriously. Take a look.
In reality, of course, Karl Marx was hugely affected by the work of Justus von Liebig, the coiner of “Liebig’s Law,” which points out that ecosystems are only as strong as their weakest links.
The Archdruid of the Ancient Order of Druids, however, can’t be bothered to crack an actual book he doesn’t like for entirely a priori and conventional reasons, despite his claim to value rebellious thought and varied opinions and analyses.
The degree to which even the wildest forms of green thinking remain utterly captive to conventional American dogma is truly astounding, and not a little scary.
Monday, November 7th, 2011
Terracycle: Greenwashers All the Way Down
When “eco-capitalists” get involved, the level of dishonesty inherent in capitalism goes up. Facts not mentioned in ordinary corporate operations turn into active, heavily researched tricks and deceptions.
Consider Terracycle, the scam being run by college drop-out Tom Szaky.
Terracyle claims to be an “upcycler,” purportedly taking used products and packages and making them into supposedly “green” new products.
Of course, though you’d never know it from the fawning coverage it receives in the capitalist press, the operation doesn’t withstand the slightest scrutiny, even from the outside.
Consider the product by which Terracycle got itself off the ground — garden fertilizer sold in re-used soda bottles. The obvious two questions about this stuff? First, what happens to the empty bottles after the fertilizer is gone? Second, given that Terracycle is a “partner” with both Coca-Cola and Frito-Lay/Pepsi, isn’t Terracycle actually yet another device for pre-empting bottle bills, to say nothing of its role in preventing people from questioning the explosion of plastic drink packaging in the first place?
Meanwhile, consider the degree of green-ness of this:
Wednesday, September 21st, 2011
A Thaw for Greenwashing!
Hurray! Capitalists are finding that the Great Recession is good for greenwashing. Per Advertising Age:
People care less about the environment or green marketing claims than they did a few years ago, yet they’re also less likely to doubt marketers’ green claims or motives, according to the new Green Gauge Report from GfK.
The 2011 version of the study, based on surveys of more than 2,000 respondents between June 9 and July 5, found only 33% said the environment is “very serious and should be a priority for everyone” this year, down from 39% last year and 46% in 2007. At the same time, 41% of people agreed with the statement “first comes economic security, then we can worry about environmental problems,” up 13 points from 2007, according to GfK.
Despite people being less responsive to environmental ad claims, they seem to believe them more often. The Green Gauge report found 39% of people say business claims about the environment aren’t accurate, substantially lower than the 48% who believed that three years ago. And 37% of respondents this year said business and industry are fulfilling their responsibility to the environment, up 8 points from 2007.
This, of course, is music to the corporate ear:
“There’s a thawing in attitudes toward greenwashing,” said [study author Timothy Kenyon]. “There’s also a realization from consumers, given the economy, that [companies] can only do so much.”
And there’s even more excellent news:
People also increasingly get their environmental information from marketers, Mr. Kenyon said.
Things to notice here include the explicit discussion of the landscape for greenwashing. That’s powerful evidence that, behind closed doors and despite public denials, greenwashing is indeed the ultimate, intentionally planned aim of corporate “green” marketing efforts.
Also, don’t let the obscurity of the name “GfK” fool you. This is the biggest of big-time work:
You can rest assured the “consumer package goods” giants are lapping up this exciting research.
Monday, August 22nd, 2011
Annals of Greenwash: Recyclebank
Recycling is the capitalist’s favorite (and only) green idea. It obliterates the question of what gets produced in the first place and points the finger at the end, rather than the beginning, of the product life cycle. It makes the behavior of “consumers,” not capitalists, the topic of concern. It implies that mere gestures are enough.
Hence, it was probably inevitable that some jerk would invent the idea of Recyclebank, the Philadelphia-based Trojan Horse for corporate ecocide.
Here’s how it works: Customers who sign-up with RecycleBank receive a special container embedded with a computer chip. Every time the recycling truck comes for a pickup, it records the weight of the bin and transmits it wirelessly to an online account. Homeowners accrue up to $35 worth of credits a month based on the amount of recycling they do.
The credits, in turn, can be turned into coupons that can be redeemed at more than 300 retailers, including Starbucks, Whole Foods, and Rite Aid. [Source: Forbes]
How green is what Recyclebank does?
First of all, its system pays people more “points” for more mass in the recycling bin, meaning higher overall product-usage rates are encouraged, not discouraged, by Recyclebank.
Of course, how else would its corporate partners — Coca-Cola, Kraft Foods, Dow Chemical, Target, Home Depot, etc. — have it?
Moreover, despite its condescending and cynical prattle about being “a group of passionate people who’ve made it our mission to inspire others to take action – small to big – that will have a positive impact on our planet,” Recyclebank is also a double shill: It pre-empts both pay-as-you-throw trash programs and bottle bills, the latter undoubtedly one of the reasons why Coca-Cola is a Recyclebank “partner.”
All the while, what do the entrepreneurs running Recyclebank really, truly think about the “consumers” they profess to care so deeply about? The usual:
In fact, advertising is a big piece of [CEO] Gonen’s strategy. As RecycleBank rolls out nationally in the next couple of years – look for a debut in some Manhattan apartment buildings this winter – he’ll have collected the names, addresses and buying habits of hundreds of thousands, possibly even millions of people.
At that point, Recycle Bank will have a database of loyal customers who manage accounts online and can be targeted by advertisers. If nothing else, it should become a place where companies can sell to “green” consumers, says Gonen.
“The core of this company is the ability to target and market to a captive audience that feels good about what they are doing,” he said.
Friday, August 5th, 2011
Comedy in Greenwash
Pretty hilarious “Eyesore of the Month” over at kunstler.com. Apparently, mega-retailer Target has taken to presenting miniscule cement-bordered weed islands in its parking lots as “Conservation Areas.” Can you imagine the chutzpah and cynicism behind this little piece of marketing? ROFLMFAO.
Friday, April 1st, 2011
Agenda Control
click to enlarge
One of advertising’s many anti-democratic aspects lies in its power as an arbitrary agenda-setter.
So, here we see Proctor & Gamble touting their efforts to use less energy in the manufacture of Charmin Ultra toilet paper.
But, ask yourself, what is the number one environmental crime inherent in manufacturing a product like Charmin Ultra?
It is not the use of electricity to run industrial facilities. It is the use of old growth timber to make “soft” toilet paper. Of course, why do they need to make this stuff “soft” in the first place? So that they can justify the exaggerated marketing claims and jacked-up prices.
The “Sustainably Manufactured” tagline is, of course, pure belligerent prevarication. Not only is the ad a conscious cover-up of the old growth facts (which P&G certainly knows would, if widely known, be lethal to the brand), but who is to say that its (alleged) slightly reduced energy use makes Charmin Ultra environmentally benign? Anybody want to wager on what a genuine investigation would reveal there?
Anyhow, such is American culture: Greenwashing ass-wipes on behalf of socio-cidal money-hoarding rentiers.
