Greenwashing: first step in the grieving process?

OK, I realize my header is a bit of a stretch, but after reading an interesting overview of some recent articles about Greenwashing as a first step in the evolution of change, I though, why not? If it’s true that Greenwashing is an effort to appease a changing consumer base, could this also be a corporation’s reaction to a loss of authenticity? The first step of grieving is denial. Greenwashing is denial incarnate. But it’s also the kind of denial that drug addicts use when confronted with the impact of their addiction on families and friends.

The next step of the grieving process is to feel the pain. From a corporate standpoint that would be the loss of revenue–granted this is not the kind of suffering caused by the loss of biodiversity or justice. Oh, if it were only possible. Yet, customers and employees of corporations have feelings and care about the world, too. Granted, different industries are more inclined than others. Mafiosi certainly love and care for the families, it’s the rest of us who need to worry.

The third step is adjusting to live without your customers. Well, deal with it.

In the next step one is asked to find a safe place in the heart. This is harder to do in the abstract. Where and how does a company have a heart? How is it manifested? In its mission? Corporate social responsibility index? Treatment of employees? Tough one to gage, but I think it’s possible. It’s certainly more visible with small businesses that have distinct personalities and clear stewardship practices.

The final and fifth step of grieving is to find a process for dealing with the love of the lost one. This is perhaps the most difficult concept to translate because when a company loses business to customers who no longer trust them, where is the love? For the former customers or the former profits? Frankly, when you read some corporate charters that state the customer is number one, it smacks a little in disingenuousness. Of course they are.

But can a company “soul”-search to discover its loss of authenticity? I think it’s possible. I’ve heard stories of many CEOs, company boards or employees deciding to transform their businesses to become equitable partners in the world community. Everyone has the potential for a life-changing insight, even the most grievous fascist (though in some cases it seems very unlikely. Cheney anyone?).

So maybe Greenwashing is a good sign after all. The challenge is to get beyond the first step.

Thanks Todd for the article link!

Untamed Two, unleashed

(watch the videos in order)

Do you want to frak this car?

One of the key themes of Carolyn Merchant’s The Death of Nature is the loss of a cultural restraining ethic in our dominant global paradigm, one that limits “progress” and prohibits the over-exploitation of land. Up to the Renaissance it was commonly held in European cultures that it was sinful to plunder Earth. With the scientific and industrial revolutions, that ethic of restraint has become a heresy, in particular if it inhibits capitalism’s primary product, growth. As I write this, though, I see how “growth” is actually a gross misnomer because what “grows” is financialization, and hence disimbedding from the constraints of nature, while simultaneously diminishing the biosphere’s diversity and “budget of flexibility,” to put in Gregory Bateson‘s words, which makes ecosystems so resilient to disturbances. Bateson likened the situation to a tightrope walker’s balance pole getting increasingly smaller. We’re on the verge of whittling ours down to the nubs of our hands.

Given this context, we should be weary of popular buzzwords like “unleash.” From the Enlightenment perspective, unleashing the autonomous self on a global scale is a virtue, but from the view of a constraining ecological ethic, “unleashing” is akin to cutting loose the ego pitbull, which has been designed not to cooperate or participate in the cultural commons, but to terrify neighbors and to destroy a sense of community, best expressed by Margaret Thatcher, who said there is “no such thing as society, only individual men and women.” She added, “Economics are the method, but the object is to change the soul” (P. 23 from David Harvey’s Brief History of Neoliberalism (highly recommended!)).

Thus we come to Untamed Two, stand-ins for two new Mini Cooper models (two new *models*, get it?). This is a fairly clear example of the merger between culture and car industries in the current waive of branded entertainment. Gleaning the ad’s imagery and banal disco-pop soundtrack, the images at best a parody of the worst kind of Euro-trash bourgeois aesthetic, “aesthetic” being a kind word given the state of the world.

Part one’s mirror motif is reminiscent of a tale told by Borges. In it he refers to an old Chinese legend about an emperor’s battle against a race of specular beings from the mirror world who had previously lived side-by-side with humans. Upon losing the war with the Yellow Emperor they were banished back to the mirror world, and forced to imitate all our movements. The legend warns that one day the people inside the mirror will return, and we’ll know of their eminent arrival when we hear the clanking of their weapons from behind the mirror. I liken the mirror people to our fractured and shadowed unconsciousness, the disembodied observer self common to people who experience extreme trauma. In our collective Western psyche, with linear perspective and later the Industrial Revolution, we pushed away from our Earthen bodies as we increasingly mass mediated our lives, disembedding ourselves from a grounded and sacred relationship with the Gaia. The mirror world starts to replace the one we evolved in.

McLuhan writes of the Narcissus myth as an allegory for our amputated selves transported into this mirror world. Failing to feel anything in our own bodies, we look to the media to re-stimulate and reawaken our machinated corpses (see Romanyshyn’s Technology as Symptom and Dream for a great discussion of the transformation of our living bodies into corpses, machines, robots and now astronauts). The more we call upon media to awaken us, the more we turn ourselves over to the mediation of our very bodies so as to avoid feeling the pain of the world.

Which brings us to the next two installments of the Mini Cooper ads. In them we see quasi-David Lynch horror edits that jar the nerves, exemplifying how media evolve to make us feel (something), thereby satisfying the viewing public’s increasingly desensitized need for amped-up nerve stimulation, the clawing, animalistic growls an allusion–and nod even–to the repressed animal-being in all of us. Not surprisingly, it’s the “wild” woman–not the rational man who is to buy the car–who invokes in the male gaze a broken mirror of the ancient, “primitive” self. She smashes a pastoral scene with cows, an ironic image given that many believe that it was the domestication of animals and plants that initiated our separation from a holistic connection to the land and each other. So the deeper shadow of our long-lost carnal selves is there, but it’s so twisted and deformed, its benevolent and mutual aid nature has been mutilated beyond recognition.

Unless you pay attention.

Here’s the beef

Burger King is becoming the Ann Coultor of marketers, which means that by reacting to their rediculous marketing strategies, we’re playing into their hands. But in the latest BK social atrocity can’t be missed only to remark on the problem of postirony, which is a sure sign of the end of marketing itself. The problem is simply that if the only way one can survive in this environment is through self-paraody, there surely must be no integrity left to fall back on.

BK ‘Sacrifices’ Whopper Facebook Application – Advertising Age – News:

CHICAGO (AdAge.com) — It all started with a little fun and games, dumping Facebook friends for a free sandwich. Burger King, through agency Crispin Porter & Bogusky, posted a Facebook application last week that promised users a free Whopper if they eliminated 10 friends.

Since then, 234,000 friends have been axed as part of “Whopper Sacrifice,” for a total of 23,400 free lunches — likely to be eaten alone. After all, the application alerted a person’s friend network when someone was dumped over one-tenth of a burger. Generally, when a Facebook user cuts a friend, the person isn’t notified, nor are any of their friends. But because Burger King was essentially singling out users for ridicule, Facebook had a beef with the application.

A cure for the postmodern blues



“The Ethics of Climate Change: Right and Wrong in a Warming World (Think Now)” (James Garvey)

Everyone has their pet cause (or should at least); mine happens to be media literacy. But I bow down to the mother of all causes, climate change, not only because of the extreme danger it represents, but because it ties together all causes (health, environment, ecology, justice, etc.) and the planet into a single problem that we can work on from multiple angles.

Regular readers are probably aware that I tend to have my head in orbit, and fly around the realm of theory a bit much. Thus I’m always thrilled to encounter a book that offers concrete action with information and philosophy to back its claims. Such a book is The Ethics of Climate Change by James Garvey. It lays out convincingly why climate change is real while written in a very practical and accessible style that delves deeply into the various ethical arguments for action or inaction, and addresses psychological reasons for why we don’t act individually or collectively. One such activity could be informing yourself by reading this excellent short treatise, and then buying a copy (or sharing yours), and giving one to the public library.

Revolution in name only

Is it my imagination or is the NYT increasingly becoming a media navel gazer by focusing more and more of its reporting on pop culture and other media? Anyhow, there was a nice little gem of an article as a result of this kind of coverage with a recent piece on the trend of artists licensing their music to advertising (see snip below). I saw this coming a while back when The Beatle’s “Revolution” aired as the soundtrack to a Nike commercial (see above), no thanks to Michael Jackson who at the time had bought the publishing rights to the Beetles catalog and started selling them mercilessly. In a strange way the commercial was a watershed for a new kind of revolution, not one intended by John Lennon.

One of the best polemics against this kind of practice comes from The Door’s drummer John Densmore in a piece he penned for The Nation a few years ago, “Riders on the Storm.” In it he tells the following story:

It all started in 1967, when Buick proffered $75,000 to use “Light My Fire” to hawk its new hot little offering–the Opel. As the story goes–which everyone knows who’s read my autobiography or seen Oliver Stone’s movie–Ray, Robby and John (that’s me) OK’d it, while Jim was out of town. He came back and went nuts. And it wasn’t even his song (Robby primarily having penned “LMF”)! In retrospect, his calling up Buick and saying that if they aired the ad, he’d smash an Opel on television with a sledgehammer was fantastic! I guess that’s one of the reasons I miss the guy.

This is why Cadillac uses Led Zeppelin’s “Rock and Roll” and not The Doors’ “Break on Through.”

The best argument comes from Tom Waits who successfully sued Taco Bell to stop imitating his sound for commercial exploitation. It’s quite simple: when you hear the song, which association do you want to have? As an artist is it acceptable that your music has been cheapened as a shilling jingle for some useless product, or rather that it enhance an emotional experience and be part of someone’s life soundtrack?

People should take seriously the Buddhist idea of right livelihood, which means that you do not contribute to other’s suffering by selling or promoting toxins or arms. Now that global warming is the primary health threat to life on this planet, any product that contributes or exacerbates climate change, such as cars or Las vegas– or marketing in general for that matter–, should be added to the list of no-nos.

The NYT article follows with a pretty good discussion of why the trend persists. One other tidbit before I go. I’m always on the lookout for good ad sources for my classes and workshops. The article mentions a Web service that helps you track down an artist that may have been heard on a commercial. The site is called FindThatSong. You may find the site useful for your own work.

Music – The New Pop Music Revolution – Pitching Products – NYTimes.com:

Apparently there’s no going back, structurally, to paying musicians to record music for its own sake. Labels that used to make profits primarily from selling albums have been struggling since the Internet caused them to lose their chokehold on distribution and exposure. Now, in return for investing in recording and promotion, and for supplying their career-building expertise (such as it was), they want a piece of musicians’ whole careers.

Ethical blind spots

Disney China
Why is it that whenever companies get into the China market their ethics seem to disappear quicker than Tibetan monks in a Chinese gulag? To be fair, Disney apparently had a take-down on the offending ad once word got out.

Curious how the the girl looks quasi-American apple pie, with a tinge of Chinese. In a way she is an avatar of the new capitalism, a hybrid of market economy and internationalized monoculture.