Wednesday, August 8, 2012 15:26
The 2012 London Olympics, hosted in a stadium that IOC asserts is “as sustainable as it is stunning,” have brought unprecedented attention not just to the athletes competing for medals, but also to the corporate sponsors competing for air time. A number of tarnished reputations plague the corporate contestants. BP Global, Dow Chemical, and Rio Tinto top the list of what consumers may consider environmentally unfriendly Olympic sponsors. Thanks to a lively coalition of environmental activists, for a short while it was possible to vote on which of the three top contenders should win the “Greenwash Gold 2012” award. Rio Tinto brought home the gold.
But how long will the collective memory of Greenwash Gold 2012 last? If the shared memory of environmental abuse itself …show more content…
In California, two recent lawsuits against water bottlers, Fiji Water and Aquamantra, accused of greenwashing indicate a groundswell of consumer and political discontent with how easy it is becoming to be green.
If Kermit only knew.
But class-action lawsuits and suits brought by attorneys-general are viable only because American consumers have invested the Federal Trade Commission with the power to protect them from fraud and deception. That protection indeed extends to the prosecution of greenwashing.
However, the public can expect the FTC to serve its dedicated function for only as long as the citizenry insists upon it. It’s not hard to submit a complaint about greenwashing; in fact, it’s as easy as filling out a form online – what FTC.gov calls a “Complaint Assistant.” The same is true with greenwashing scandals. If media literacy and environmentally responsible consumption continue to thrive, greenwashing scandals can’t die down. Consumers can keep them alive by purchasing genuinely green products and supporting media entities that educate them about