This is a presentation I just did at the annual Public Relations Institute of New Zealand Conference on the Fair Trading Act and the new guidelines covering green marketing. This was mixed in with some of the AA1000 principles and the 7 sins of greenwashing as well. Went really well, full house and lots of laughing, which was the plan. :)
Intro – who I am Sustainability Practitioner – working for 13 years in field Currently sustainability manager at NSCC Prior to that – sustainability consultant for URS – spent a great deal of time on sustainability report development and verification Prior to that – sustainability manager for Interface
Essentially, consumers won’t just accept what you’re saying, they’ll check, and legislation also doesn’t allow it. If you’ve got any hope of positively managing your client’s reputation or project it is essential that you get this stuff right. LINK – so we’ll have a look at the legislation itself…
I think what’ll be of most interest and use to you as public relations and communications professionals will be if I basically take you through what is going to keep you out of trouble. And in the interests of being transparent, I just want to remind you that I am not a lawyer, so what you’re getting here is basically my take on it, although you’ll find the legislation pretty self-explanatory anyway. Go on to say what it is and explain how it works with AA1000 LINK – so why did they develop the act in the first place – there’s a fair trading act already?...
LINK – and companies have already been warned…
Resene – actually had low VOC’s Forento - No proof of this at all Hyundai – claimed their hybrid out performed others with no evidence Inghams – chicken feed contained 13% GM soy LINK – in essence, the important thing to remember is…
Let’s be honest, even if you didn’t know it was a 50 zone, you’ll still get fined for doing 80. LINK: So, what are the most common ways you can get yourself into trouble?
These are the key things to be mindful of in your communications, which I’ll run through in more detail, with some examples of each. They may seem fairly self-evident, but it’s actually quite easy to be guilty of one of these without realising it. There is also one called ‘misleading’, but I’ve taken this out, as pretty much anything covered by one of the others can also be misleading. LINK – I’ll take you through each of these in turn now, giving you some examples of each. All of the examples I’m using are real, either from products or from report verifications I have done.
Corporate Social Responsibility Doubtful – the receptionist didn’t look too chuffed when I walked in Absolutely, 100%, without a doubt, impossible Far easier to disprove than prove.
None of these actually mean anything by themselves + they have all become very overused/cliché Natural doesn’t mean good – give cleaning example - Snake venom and uranium are ‘natural’ – doesn’t mean they’re good for you! The word ‘sustainable’ is almost impossible to prove, especially if it’s company based – we’re a sustainable company – oh really says the auditor, and how will you prove that one? To be ‘sustainable’ – absolutely no impact on environmental, social, economic or cultural aspects Leads me nicely into the next slide
Examples from a facial tissues box And what exactly is “modern environmental thinking”? And how often is “wherever possible” – what’s the recycled content – surely they know don’t they? It’s not just about the words on the packaging, it’s about clearly explaining what that means
A letter from a mate isn’t going to cut it And imagine trying to prove any of the previous slides words – sustainable, eco-friendly etc – pretty much impossible. LINK - Just a quick side-note while we’re talking about certification…
Even legitimate logos can be misleading Green Business Network – is it reasonable to assume that someone seeing that logo will assume there is some form of accreditation? Definitely watch out for creating your own though – an “eco-coffee” brand for example LINK – but most of the headings I’ve covered so far are fairly easy to avoid…
Forest Stewardship Council and low Volatile Organic Compounds LINK – so, moving back to the topics again…
Being CFC-free is not a legitimate point of competitive differentiation Don’t claim any environmental benefit that is shared by all or most of your competitors
In essence this is about ‘slight of hand’ pointing the spot light at one area in the hope that people won’t see the larger picture Advertising Standards Authority – Holden adverts removed Lesser of 2 evils - A claim that may be true within the product category, but that risks distracting the consumer from the greater environmental impacts of the category as a whole LINK – these are somewhat similar to the next one, Half-Truths…
Basically, only telling the selected bits of information that make you sound good – leaving out the parts of the story that would provide the full picture. But what was the question – what are the top 10 health issues that worry you? The question they didn’t report on LINK - There are still plenty of things you can say on behalf of your clients who operate in this space, but you have to be careful and really know your stuff – in this context, that may mean you need to educate your clients and try and manage the marketing teams. Here are some links to the most useful information…
Thank you for your time and attention and now I’m happy to take any questions you have…