A Popcorn Brain guide to greenwash-free marketing

by Ivar Laanen

In 2003, imperial meathead Vladimir Putin said that if global warming was real, it would simply mean that Russia will “spend less on fur coats.” By 2021, his tone had seriously changed. “We have entire cities built on permafrost in the Arctic. If it all starts to thaw, what consequences will Russia face? Of course, we are concerned.”

With even Putin, one of the world’s biggest climate deniers (and war criminals), convinced of Mother Nature’s greatest threat, we’d like to believe humanity has moved past the era of raising climate change awareness and onto the era of solution-based action. But are we? With time ticking, are we willing to act fast?

Ahead of November’s (fruitless) COP26 climate conference in Glasgow, a survey of 10 countries including the US and France found less than half (46%) of respondents expressed a willingness to personally make significant lifestyle changes for the climate. In the Netherlands, that percentage stood at a measly 37%, despite 78% of respondents recognizing climate change as a serious threat.

There is, however, one thing people seem willing to do for Mother Nature: spend money supporting businesses that commit to protecting nature and natural resources. A 2021 Simon-Kucher study of over 10,000 people in 17 countries showed that 85% of respondents indicated a climate-conscious shift in their purchase behavior over the past 5 years. The study also found that more than one third (34%) of the population is willing to pay more for products or services they believe to be “sustainable.” Gen Z (39%) and Millenials (42%) showed an even greater willingness to pay more.

These findings speak to the unprecedented power that corporate brands wield over the health of our planet. People simply lack the international sway that brands have today, and so they entrust their money with companies they believe have a positive impact on the Earth.

The keyword here is “believe.” Seeking to capitalize on the desire for “greener” goods, companies left and right are spending more money trying to create the perception of being climate-positive than actually re-inventing their business in a way that serves Mother Nature. Sadly, it works.

Many of the world’s most profitable companies from all industries market their products as “coral-reef friendly” or “supporting forests worldwide” when in reality they contain chemicals that kill coral reefs or require rainforests to be chopped down. Rather than help the environment, consumers who want to support coral reefs or rainforests are unknowingly supporting businesses that destroy them.

At Popcorn Brain, we’ve had to think a lot about the greenwashing problem. We recognize the great power corporates wield over the health of our planet–and we want that power to be used for good. We want businesses with legitimate climate initiatives to be able to communicate them to consumers in a greenwashed world where words like “sustainability” have become utterly meaningless. That’s why we’ve created this: a 4-step guide to doing climate communication without falling into the greenwashing trap.

Step 1: Stop using the word sustainable (and a number of other glossy green terms)

Oxford Dictionary defines sustainable as “able to be maintained at a certain rate or level.” It is a painfully laughable term in our modern context. We live within a capitalist system built upon the need for infinite growth. Us humans already use 1.6 times more natural resources than the Earth can regenerate. To “sustain” such a system at its current rate is to send a deathwish to our planet.

Other debated definitions of “sustainable” exist, but at this point it doesn’t matter.

Semantic satiation has kicked in, the process by which a word becomes meaningless when we hear or read that particular word over and over and over.

“It’s called reactive inhibition: When a brain cell fires, it takes more energy to fire the second time, and still more the third time, and finally the fourth time it won’t even respond unless you wait a few seconds,” says Leon James, a psychology professor who coined the term after a number of experiments in 1962. “It’s a kind of fatigue.”

Eventually, our brain stops responding to the word and it becomes meaningless. “Sustainable” has become one of those words. Ever since the 1987 Brundtland Commission of the UN used the term “sustainable” to describe “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs,” the word has constantly been abused by government bodies and corporates who do anything but stick to the UN’s definition.

What this tells us is that relying on the word “sustainable” in brand marketing is not only useless; it also displays a certain ignorance about the climate crisis and what needs to be done to solve it. And while we’re at it, it’s best to veer away from the highly similar word “conservation” as well as other buzzwords such as “eco-friendly” or “green” which have no defined meaning. The inherent vagueness of these terms allows them to be used as a veil behind which brands can hide–it’s the oldest trick in the greenwashing book.

Unsure what to replace these words with in your messaging? We’ll get to that.

Step 2: Be Honest and Show the Process

Even the most well-known climate-conscious companies put strain on natural resources in some way. There’s a reason Patagonia, perhaps the most recognized environmentally-conscious fashion brand in the world, refuses to call itself “sustainable” or anything of the like.

Patagonia is often cited when it comes to marketing sans greenwashing–and for good reason. The brand publicly sets ambitious climate targets, is transparent about its manufacturing process, and shares updates on its progress. But most importantly, Patagonia is very blunt about where it succeeds and where it fails.

On its goal of eliminating waste and emissions, Patagonia’s Director of Environmental Action Beth Thoren wrote this in the publication Fortune:

“Previously, we set ourselves the target of carbon neutrality by 2025. But purchasing offsets to get us there doesn’t erase the footprint we create and won’t save us in the long run. We must first put the weight of our business behind drastically cutting emissions across the full length of our supply chain. What is unsettling is that, right now, we aren’t entirely sure how to do this. Our pledge to use only renewable or recycled materials in our products by 2025 is a case in point. We have spent years of work on this, and our recycled content is now up to 68% of our total usage—still not enough. Investigating all the options, from upweighting the sale of secondhand products to moderating growth and cutting the breadth of our product line, only reinforces our belief that we can’t do this alone.”

We love this. Make the mess, the message. Here Patagonia gives us a rare peek into the manufacturing process and shows us all that even the biggest brands cannot just finance their way into waste-free operations. In one fell swoop they also remain critical about the imperfect practice of purchasing carbon credits while inviting collaboration with other brands in order to scale up solution (step 3), which ultimately is the only way we can slow climate change and cut down on waste.

An overwhelming majority of the public is well aware of the climate crisis. They are educated; treat them as such. Give people access to the information they need to make informed decisions. Refrain from misleading labels and buzzwords, and be transparent about each step your brand is taking to help serve the Earth better. When your brand does this, two things are accomplished: your audience feels respected and your brand builds trust–and there’s no better way to boost business than earning real trust.

Step 3: Invite collaboration and be open to feedback

Recently, we made a film for Stellar, the open-source blockchain company. From Stellar we learned something vital: that collaboration–no matter how uncomfortable that may be–is essential. Stellar comes from the world of decentralized finance and cryptocurrencies, a world with a central goal of bypassing centralized institutions such as banks and governments when it comes to money. For that reason we were surprised to find that Stellar is adamant about working closely with banks and governments.

Why would they do that? Isn’t decentralized finance trying to subvert these institutions? It felt like an odd collaboration at first, but when we spoke with people at Stellar, it started to make more sense. In the early days of the Internet, tech giants like Google and Mozilla believed they should self-regulate. They wanted nothing to do with regulating governments–the Web must be open, they believed. But because the regulators and policymakers were excluded, they didn’t understand the technology–and now we find ourselves in this situation today where privacy is a fickle concept and where all our data is being harvested.

That’s why Stellar collaborates with governments and banks: they want them to understand what a platform like Stellar can do for them so that inclusive financial solutions can be scaled and so that these institutions don’t waste time trying to shut down something they don’t understand.

Coming back to anti-greenwashing, Patagonia shows its true commitment to the environment through its open invitations for collaboration. Like many clothing brands, Patagonia produces clothing in shared factories, often alongside other big brands. The bulk of its emissions come from these factories where they yield less control. To overcome this, Patagonia has set up a joint funding mechanism whereby other brands can partner with them to invest in creating less wasteful manufacturing solutions in exchange for carbon credits. The idea is to then share their learnings as widely as possible within their industry in order to scale practical solutions. While inventing a waste-reducing solution is great, the only way we can make a tangible environmental impact is if we scale up those solutions.

Beyond company-to-company collaboration, a good way to position your brand as actually giving a shit about the Earth is to give customers the potential to provide feedback or ask questions. This two-way street of communication holds the brand more accountable to its claims and also gives a brand the opportunity to gain an outsider’s perspective on how its messaging is being perceived. It may be uncomfortable to receive feedback, but it will only fine tune your brand for the better.

Step 4: Check yourself for accidental greenwashing

There’s a fine line between promoting your environmentally-driven brand and greenwashing. Even if you follow the steps above, your brand can still fall into the trap of accidental greenwashing–the act of focusing too much marketing on a few environmental claims that, while legitimate, are still not representative of your brand’s overall carbon footprint. Your brand may grow its food organically, but if it’s being flown across the world to get here, its footprint is still going to be massive. It’s also greenwashing if your brand uses one legitimate claim to take credit for other potential environmental benefits that “could” happen as a result of that one claim (e.g: our brand is restoring whale populations by using less plastic, which reduces ocean waste, which helps keep whales healthy and plastic-free).

Accidental greenwashing can also happen when there’s a disconnect between the product development team and the marketing team, who may stretch the facts for a good “green” image. The only solution here is to make sure there’s clear communication between both sides. If possible, foresee the ways in which a marketer might manipulate or stretch the facts so that you can prevent any misleading narrative from being created in advance.

Final Words

More than ever, people are using their money to support the climate action they want to see. But as long as greenwashing remains as invasive in marketing as it is today, far too much of that money will end up in the hands of corporates who act without the environment in mind. We need better, more transparent climate communication from brands. The more brands nail this, the better consumers will be at distinguishing actual climate-conscious brands from the BS greenwashers. Only then can the power of consumer choice be realized. So take our tips. Fly! We hope they’ll help your brand on its way to better climate communication.

Popcorn BrainMarch 3, 2022