- Warning: this is more of an opinionated ramble. Do not expect an evidence based argument behind this. The title is clickbait - something I rue, but the intent is to make a point on this topic.
- TLDR:
- My view is that marketing and advertising is the real villain preventing a more sustainable world.
- I find it curious that many “thought leaders” and the activists shouting the loudest come from PR/Marketing/Advertising backgrounds.
Whether sustainability or economic, I have generally viewed the marketing and advertising industry with disdain. There are two main reasons why.
Control of the Narrative - by talkers, not doers
Up until what I felt was a turning point in around 2019 or so, sustainability fell into the realm of Corporate Social Responsibility and Public Relations. While an understandable and natural pathway for the initiative to develop, I have been a little disappointed and even angsty about the dominance of marketers in the sustainability field. Indeed, marketers and PR firms were first movers in the corporate world of Sustainability. This has only grown in weight as green has become more and more marketable and attractive.
What irks me the most is that Marketers are experts in storytelling, and are not always the most practical people. I view the insensibilities of sustainable fashion, continued consumption habits, metal straws and organic tote bags being driven by the hand of the marketer. As discussed, there is a real danger of this doing more harm than good to the planet.
Unlike the common narrative of big oil being perceived as the main culprit on sustainability, I strongly believe it is the advertising industry that is the real criminal here. Social media and pay-to-promote influencers are complicit in this.
This has resulted in a spread of misinformation, to the detriment of the planet.
A disappointment in Green media and Thought leadership
There are several articles I have come across that triggered this post.
Case in point 1: Marketing as misinformation
An article on: “The City of Sydney, the central borough of the larger Australian metropolis, is now entirely on green energy”
My god - No its fucking not. Electricity consumption is NOT energy as I described in my previous post. Even so, saying 3/4 of energy is met by Wind and the remaining by Solar completely overlooks the issue of base-load capacity and the problems faced with intermittency.
Case in point 2: Marketing as misinformation v2
An original article that stated: “Solar could make up 43% of Singapore’s energy mix by 2050: study” that has since been edited to “Solar could meet 43% of Singapore’s power demand during mid-day by 2050: study” Notice the difference? To my chagrin - the author cannot hide from its original stance since it has been cited by another website. I will let this backtracking and rewriting of the headline speak for itself. I actually picked this up from the local reddit.
Case in Point 3: Marketing drives consumerist behaviour
Yay best metal straws. Why the hell would these come in packs of 8?? (equates to 1192 plastic straws - which I think is still an underestimate given export/import costs).
This is exactly the type of green consumerism is that is well suited to the tactics of marketers. The usual saying of we “buy shit we don’t need” and the whole argument about how materialism doesn’t make you happy points to a model that does not work. I remain conflicted on how to rationalise the role of the marketer and how they can be repurposed to get people to consume less (which as discussed in my previous most, is a sensible outcome).
Case in point 4: The Anti -Plastic cult
Media coverage has absolutely exploded over the years, though the knowledge has been around and well-researched for decades.
Taking a contrarian stance to the extreme narrative - my view is that not all plastic is bad, and the anti-plastic narrative has been driven out of proportion due emotion rather than practicality. There are huge benefits from a hygiene and safety point of view for many industries. Food and Healthcare included. My gut feel is that such conveniences are overlooked and taken for granted. How many of the most vocal ones have worked in the healthcare (too busy saving lives ) or the food & beverage industry (too busy filling tummies and meeting the whims of entitled customers).
To me, the argument on the biodegradability of plastic (legit concern) is an issue of disposal, not use. I am an advocate of sensible plastic use and adequate disposal, and not the immediate OMGPLASTICKISBAD.
I wonder - Should resources be invested into plastic alternatives or addressing the issue of waste disposal?
My personal bugbear
What pains me the most is that many of these are written by journalists who are meant to be experts following the field closely!
At best, some people may feel good. At worst, these narratives are fueling unreasonable expectations of people actually working on the technology or to blame institutions or governments for not doing enough. Again, I reiterate - the solution is not as straight forward as you think!
I do not believe that all marketers are wrong, and I certainly do not think that many spread misinformation with malicious intent.
Instead, it is my hope that advocates, influencers and thought leaders be more informed in how they interpret and publish information. Sure, I understand the need for hype and clickbait titles for people to rally towards - but I don’t believe that is what the world needs now. We need real solutions and collaboration that can be fostered through accurate information and truth - no matter how hard they may be.
In my next post, I discuss my own personal response and actions, and contemplate the trade-offs behind the challenges ahead…