Commentary
Green: The New Black?
- by Brad Stewart , September 30, 2009
Some of us will remember the wave of environmental optimism that accompanied the early 1990s. Protests against the war in Iraq, coupled with communitarian optimism, and one of the largest gatherings in green history: Earth Day 1990. I was in New York that day celebrating with over a million optimistic people in Central Park.
But, when the stilt-walking clowns, crowds, and trombone players dissipated, I also remember seeing more trash than I'd ever seen littering the curbs of Fifth Avenue. It was a stark reminder that though we were marching towards a compelling goal, the genuine spirit of sustainability and respecting our environment still had not melted fully into our collective consciousnesses.
Fast forward almost 20 years: another war in Iraq over, the greatest recession of all time looming, an "Inconvenient Truth" still resonating, and it seems we are in the midst of another resurgence of environmental responsibility. My station wagon is brimming with cloth bags again, green has a home within MediaPost, and just about everywhere you turn there is a marketing initiative for some charity or another.
But will it last? Most who read this blog, including myself, hope that the critics are wrong, and this new era of green will have stamina that the earlier green movements lacked. Are there key differences in this particular green resurgence, or will we be throwing our colloquial trash on the curb again, once the recession is over and the consumption party begins yet anew?
I wouldn't be writing this if I didn't think there was hope. However, mass change needs to occur from both ends of the power pyramid, in order to be sustainable: Grassroots and industry-led movements need to symbiotically compliment one another. As it turns out, marketers and advertisers have a unique position within this interplay. We hold a privileged position in the attention and persuasion industries to permanently stratify "green" into our society's collective conscious, on the consumer side AND on the advertiser/corporate side.
As professionals who are still swimming in the turbulent waters of a great recession, we also have a sense of what matters most in order to incentivize change within corporations, the other sort of green, good ol' ROI, or bottom line. Just like governments often see green as a vote getter, but not necessarily as a candidate for global policy change, advertisers must also see the greenback benefit to green campaigns. This is where we must enter stage left (pun intended) aggressively, creatively and strategically.
I've been given the honor of a monthly column in Marketing:Green, on the 4th Wednesday of the month, for the remainder of 2009. In that time, I will use this forum as a collaborative tool to discuss ideas aimed at leveraging the unique qualities of various powerful traditional media (October: outdoor; November: print; December: TV). The idea is for creative, strategic, operational, and any other media pro to brainstorm wildly and collaborate, with the goal of indelibly cementing "green" into media strategies of all types. I already have a notepad brimming with ideas ranging from the "so-crazy-it-just-might-work" to the "as long as no one gets hurt."
I invite everyone to please share in the discussion forum below, or email me directly. I will focus in the next months on the most outlandish, creative, or perhaps even brilliant ideas in terms of incorporating green into traditional media. I'm hoping this exercise will create some connections with like-minded individuals, initiate some deal flow, and act as the genesis to numerous award-winning campaigns. Hopefully, then, we can prevent green from being remembered once again as merely "the new black."
I agree with you, Brad, about "green" oversaturation, but I also believe that marketing and media mirrors a real social change trajectory. The proverbial "paradignm shift" is happening slowly in people's minds and in small actions (recycling, cloth bags, hybrid cars). However, I believe it will take a larger shift (new, drastic gas costs and taxes, ever-increasing food costs) to really move consumers to change their patterns. Campaigns and media that harken us back to basics (communal care, the locavore movement, gardening, canning, sharing, bartering) are the ones to keep our eyes on for success metrics, e.g. Organic Gardening & Real Simple magazine and Craig's List.
I was raised on a farm in Ohio where we had our own garden, let a bucket of fresh from the cow milk stand to let the cream rise to the top then churned our own butter....to think that after we have come this far in culture and civilization to go back to that time plagues me. Surely technology can get us to where we need to be without having to in total resort to communal, salt of the earth methods of living.
For instance, there is technology that exists to transform garbage in landfills to energy in Canada. The obstacle to the progress of this technology (which would seem to solve many problems) are how municipalities function. Looks like a problem for private enterprise to solve.
That said, why is no one really spending any money here? What happened to the stimulus funding for this? Where are all the green jobs?
My line is this "If Green is the New Black, then why are we all still so yellow?"
The mass change to adopt greener behavior will be driven by psycho-economics. Ultimately people need to sense personal benefit to change. There will always be the values-driven segment of greenies, and I am willing to believe this segment is growing, especially across generations. I'm not a cynic but I agree with Jacquie: mass behavioral change will only happen when people personally experience higher costs for environmentally irresponsible behavior. The traditional way to achieve that is taxes. As marketers, our contribution can be to keep pushing the value envelope inside our firms so that green actually becomes the economically smarter choice.
Good thoughts Brad.
Eventually (hopefully soon), being green won't be much of a selling point as consumers will expect the brands they support to be making strides towards lessening our collective footprints. Those that don't will hopefully go away.
I think the next step in green, which is already going on in my opinion, is making it less "crunchy" and more hip. As price comes down and products look more traditional, going green will become a lot easier for many consumers.
As one who was recently let go from a good sized mid-western ad agency because of the reduction in spending, I am helping to take the green idea a step further...only a small one, but a step non-the-less. How? By introducing into the US and Canada a truly biodegradable shopping bag to replace those ubiquitous plastic shopping bags.
Made in part from the root of the tapioca plant, these bags biodegrade in one year or less once placed in water, soil, compost or landfill....traditional bags take up to 1,000 years to degrade. They take less energy to produce than any other bag out there. AND this bag doesn't require a change in consumer habits! We are happy to have these thrown away!
So I have traded by network buying job to do some PR, and become a sales person in something I can truly believe in! Check it out at ecoplasusa.com...and just ask for that bag lady!
This is an all too realistic view of the culture at large. We get bored with the eco-ethos. It becomes inconvenient to use the recycling facilities. We forget to turn the water off while we brush our teeth for a few days, and then we are back in our old ways. Ah, the slippery slope of myopia and self-absorption. I have a whole soap box on American selfishness and stupidity. But, that is not the intent of this comment. The intent is this:
It is up to the media to take responsibility for educating and informing and making the mission of environmental responsibility exciting and palatable. Those of us in the media know our market. Consumers of our media are not going to change en masse: Voila! The problem does not get solved without conscious intention on our part to deliver the excitement about the goods and services, organizations and institutions that are truly ‘green.’ If the current sustainability movement becomes passé, I will not be blaming FOX News, I will pin the tail on the Utne Reader and the rest of us pulling for the cause. The agencies with the brands that are truly sustainable may have to step up to the plate to explode the correct concept with less revenue rendered rather than the play spin that gets the biggest buck. www.mindfulmetropolis.com Richard McGinnis, CEO
I agree with the way you put it, Brad - that we as marketers are in the *privileged* position of helping to "permanently stratify 'green' into our society's collective conscious, on the consumer side AND on the advertiser/corporate side." From my perspective - with marketing to women getting so much attention these days (new books, studies, experts), perhaps it is also worth noting that the more holistic way of seeing things - as the more sustainably-minded consumer, male or female, tends to - is the way women have long been known to consider purchases. So, reaching "green" consumers already has a template, and "green" advertisers/brands have a huge advantage if they've already been paying attention to how women buy. Part of stratifying green into the collective conscious from the advertiser side is reminding them how much women may be watching, and waiting.
If last week's cover story in Newsweek, ranking "The Greenest Big Companies in America," is any indication, corporations will soon be catching on to the economic benefits of green that go beyond marketing gimmicks. The business angle of developing (and selling) new technologies and even adhering to new regulations governing emissions will keep green alive and growing beyond a mere trend to become a social norm. When that happens, rest assured that marketers will have already jumped on the next new fad and begun to bludgeon it to death.
I would like to know how many media people, who do the planning, buying, creative, etc, have really changed their lifestyles to be more "green". As they work with their clients, are they working from a position of having bought "green products"; do they find the products hard to find or do they find the products to be expensive and if so compared to what. A lot of Eco-friendly products are concentrated and come in reusable bottles, so expensive compared to what?
Excellent points, all round.
Starting with Jacquie: I have to admit, the "realist" in me worries that green oversaturation could frighten away corporate spending prematurely. Perhaps punitive measures are the only way to go, in order to maintain greener habits. Or perhaps, to speak to Kim's problem, a total freeze on investment into technologies that don't demonstrate adequate green value propositions!
I know a few small startups in the waste to energy space. They are struggling. The money out there for innovation is frustratingly lacking. That "yellow" quote is brilliant.
Brian: your comment feeds in beautifully to this conversation. Instead of increased ROI on the basis of increased sales (to be honest, this is the only way my primitive brain has thought of this issue), ROI on the basis of cost savings!
Bill: green as brand/lifestyle association, and not necessarily only as action driver. Yes!
Perhaps ROI from green should be measured differently than other ROI (does a sale from a green campaign means more than a sale from a deep discount or loyalty campaign?).
Jan: the product innovators like you deserve kudos. What better way to institutionalize "green" than to develop entire product lines that don't depend on a specific type of behavior. Doesn't it feel good to know that your waking hours are spent making money + helping preserve the planet?!
Richard: I agree with you agreeing with me! What a love in ;)! Let's do something about this. We are far too creative and intelligent to not take a leadership role in our unique positions as media professionals.
This is all excellent food for thought, which helps me frame the next article about outdoor advertising.
How can we take all that outdoor space and turn it into ground-breaking greenery?
Can we do for green what Obama did for social media in terms of long term, irrefutable credibility?
Please email me or add me as a friend within the MediaPost forum with your comments, or outlandish ideas!! brad@adjoy.com
Personally I am more on the cynical side of green that you allude to in this post. I particularly question not only the motives of the marketers but of the population at large. Is green the new black or is it just the flavour du jour.
The rationalization for the cynicism is what motivates the average consumer ... is it a desire to genuinely what is good for the environment or a need to feel good. IMHO more the later. Many of the feel good green initiatives are just that comfort food for baby boomer plebeians rather than results oriented initiatives. This reminds me of your rally experience in Central Park where the intent was to show support for the environmental cause, however, the result was an unbelievable amount of refuse left in the wake of the event but hey ... everyone felt good.
A green initiative gone awry in my opinion is the replacement incandescent light bulbs with florescent light bulbs. On the surface this sounds like a great idea less power, better for the environment and we can all feel good. Dig a little deeper and it is anything but better. Florescent bulbs contain the heavy metal mercury which after years of consumers discarding florescent light bulbs will contaminate our land fill sites and lead to a far bigger problem than the one it was intended to solve. In the short term, however, baby boomers get that warm soup feeling that hey we are doing well for the environment. BTW the next generation of LED lights provide a far better, more environmentally friendly and energy efficient alternative than Florescent Light bulbs. However, the excellent spin on the greenness of fluorescent has resulted in black.
In my opinion the necessary ingredient to give green longevity and staying power is the proper motivation with a focus on real results. This requires a significant paradigm shift in the average consumer to be more concerned about sustainable results and far less about superficial satisfaction of pretending to be green.
As Kermit the frog used to say “It is not easy being Green”.
In 1994, I hosted a three day conference with the subject- "if you had 10,000 acres of land and wanted to house 50,000 people, where automobiles weren't the primary form of transportation and where the physical and soft design of the master planned development including social responsibility and "community building"-
There were sociologists, philosophers, master planned developers, deans of design schools, etc.
My point isn't to applaud myself, but to suggest that fundamental, not incremental changes are what it will take to truly effectuate change.
Americans don't like fundamental change, however, we have no choice.
As marketers, its our responsibility to explore and learn about fundamental changes that would in fact be more encompassing than a Tesla, and submit to our clients that the products they produce will need to be altered in order for them to stay in business.
The channels we use? Oh, we all know all of them, being clever in our use of them is what we tout about ourselves, but honestly, this is all pretty simple,- Millenials don't respond to TV, Internet or Mobile-nor should they, so they have to be reached via a Peer Group message. Gen X- are the reason Ralph Lauren and hotels selling their beds exist- so reach them via the status of being green and saving the Earth. Boomer feel guilty because they had the opportunity in the 70's to turn this issue around, but "copt out" and "went mainstream"- so use the radio, tv and other traditional media's to provide them with call to actions (remember they quit the first time and will quit again, but they do have over 60% of all disposable income in the US)
so, let's decide if we want to give lip service to this, or get sincere
I look forward to your next message
Christopher: critical points here. I agree about fundamental change. And, I believe you're right about people not wanting radical change in general. "Radical" itself is considered a pejorative term, even though it just means "to the root of". Myself, I'm a fan of roots. Cooking up a carrot soup today in fact ;)
The other point, which I'll be sure to highlight in the next articles, is that different mediums are more/less effective for varying target audiences. AND, according to you, each segment are susceptible to different types of messaging.
By the way everyone, I've received numerous emails about green initiatives in various mediums. Stay tuned for the collaborative columns. Titles will likely be simple. Green: Print, Green: TV, etc.