Okay okay, so this is a traditional billboard and not the incredible energy-producing Windvertising billboard, but I still have to point out the well-executed messaging and placement from Mythic Paint.
It’s not everyday you see great marketing from a paint company, in fact some may even draw criticism for their green messaging. Even better that Mythic Paint seems to be the real deal and committed to removing all toxins from their products, not just VOCs.
Kudos to you Mythic Paint.
Greenwashing isn’t black and white. If there are different levels of being green, then there must be different levels of greenwashing. I’ll be the first to admit that I have a hard time seeing through the marketing slogans and clever copy. I don’t know all the chemicals I should be looking out for in products. Sometimes, I’m unfamiliar with the recyclability or manufacturing process behind a material. Sometimes, I need help or a second opinion.
Well, my best friend, the Internet, does not let me down. Enter The Greenwashing Index, a site promoted by EnviroMedia Social Marketing with the help of the University of Oregon School of Journalism and Communication. The smart folks behind the Index understand the idea that greenwashing isn’t cut and dry and have devised a one-to-five rating scale accordingly.
In true Web 2.0 form, users on the site can also comment and rate ads posted by other users. I used to rely on the green blogosphere to call out examples of greenwashing, but now there is a centralized system for the sharing and rating of these examples.
The site seems to be starting off slow as far as traffic goes, so I’d like to take a second and ask you to check it out. Hopefully, over the next few months, The Greenwashing Index will gain enough popularity and begin to positively influence green marketing.
Disclaimer:
I have no connection at all to the site or the organizations behind it. I think the site fills a needed gap in green marketing and want to see it do well.
This seems to be the mentality behind much of the green marketing out there, specifically in the construction industry. Marketers are scrambling to find originality in green marketing and in their frenzy produce sub-standard creative that either offends because it’s greenwashing or because it’s just poor creative.
As a marketing professional and believer in the green movement, it’s hard for me to determine which is more offensive. I think the core problem with green marketing is that manufacturers of ‘green’ products have an ultimate misunderstanding of what their audiences want. This, of course, can then be tracked back to a lack of knowledge about what their audiences really know.
For example, what’s the difference in general green IQ between an architect and contractor? How about a designer and builder? Engineer and inspector? Judging by a quick flip through any trade pub, most do not understand the differences. As a result, we end up with poorly targeted ads that completely miss their audience’s interests.
Architects may not be as focused on the bottom line as a builder. And a builder might not be as concerned with aesthetics as an architect. It’s as though the green movement started and marketers completely forgot everything they knew about the audiences they try so hard to reach.
So instead, we are the recipients of grossly overgeneralized marketing that sets out to cover everything green. Have a green product? Throw a leaf in your logo and show a meadow in the background of your print ads and you’re good to go.
Screw it, it’s green.
