Adland Is Nothing but Crickets on Climate

The flurry of climate-related commitments following the 2015 Paris Agreement—laying out a plan for keeping global warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels—grew oddly quiet in 2023 as many brands dampened their sustainability communications. Despite climate change’s continued threat, messaging around it has turned into a political and regulatory minefield. But it’s not just culture wars and upcoming elections that have brands spooked—there’s also a cyclical nature to progress that could make this quiet period a productive one. As regulations ramp up and activists continue their drumbeat on climate action, a period of greenhushing has the potential to separate the wheat from the chaff on advertisers’ sustainability messages, experts told ADWEEK. Ego vs. eco Backlash to the environmental, social and governance (ESG) movement reached a fever pitch in 2023, leading major financial institutions to pull out of the Climate Action 100+ initiative. With roughly half the global population headed to the polls this year, brands are steering clear of anything that could devolve into a political culture war—and that includes sustainability. “We are seeing some disappointing trends around … sustainability and DEI,” said Lauren Lotka, founder and CEO of recruitment agency Lotka&Co. Those initiatives are “failing to receive the funding from the organizations that made very big commitments not that long ago.” Still, much of what’s on the chopping block is there because it doesn’t directly impact the bottom line in terms of dollars or emissions. Many climate-focused campaigns have been more about creativity, brand positioning and value signaling than the kind of sustainability communications that shift consumer behaviors and cut emissions for the company and consumer alike. "The vast majority of eco-marketing, sustainability marketing, etc., wasn't marketing—it was ego PR," said Solitaire Townsend, co-founder and chief solutionist at sustainability-focused agency Futerra. "It was companies making hugely uplifting, beautiful 30-second spots that won Cannes awards and made everyone feel fantastic, but it did nothing for the brand. It didn't sell any products." The cyclical nature of progress While the last few years have dealt consistent economic challenges to brands and agencies, elections and budget constraints don’t tell the whole story, said Austin Whitman, CEO of Change Climate Project, a nonprofit platform that helps companies measure, reduce and offset climate impact. Whitman noted at least one brand repeatedly delaying and reworking public announcements related to their sustainability work. “It's more zeitgeist and cyclical than it is economically driven," Whitman said. "We're still in the hangover from last year's anti-ESG backlash.” He estimates that the backlash is only in the “middle stages” of playing itself out. Change Climate has certified 344 companies with its Climate Neutral label, which aims to signal to sustainability-minded consumers that the certified brand has taken its climate impact seriously and is doing the work to reduce and make up for its emissions through effective offsetting programs. Whitman expects the company to maintain the same number of total certifications this year as some drop their commitments and others join. While certified companies occupy a wide spectrum from those with sustainability woven into the business strategy and those that came to prioritize it later, Whitman noted that attrition is coming from “both ends.” "Where's the positive feedback for companies with sustainability initiatives?” he asked. Many companies that launched in the era of low interest rates are now looking for an exit strategy—either through a sale or IPO—and want to demonstrate higher margins to investors. Cutting sustainability departments or lowering environmental or quality standards, like Panera recently did, can improve profitability in the short term. The value-action barriers One example of a true sustainability communications effort, Townsend explained, would be helping consumers understand the behavior changes necessary to move from single-use products to refillables. While many analysts describe a “value-action gap,” referring to shoppers who say they want sustainable products but don’t always buy them in practice, Townsend argues that it’s more commonly a barrier than a gap—and often involves brand innovation and investment to remove those barriers. “[If] we bring down those barriers, we could do significantly well,” she said. “But we're going to have to do this like it is actual grown-up marketing—not some sort of feel-good fetish for the people and agencies who [are] involved.” Major polluters are poisoning the well There’s one category of advertiser that hasn’t boarded the greenhushing train: Big Oil. While many of the world’s top advertisers are slowing sustainability messaging as they determine how greenwashing regulations in the U.K. and litigation in the U.S. might impact their businesses, oil and gas brands have continued messaging in contrast to their investments. That’s a problem for more than just the climate, said Duncan Meisel, executive director of Clean Creatives. The campaign, part of Fossil Free Media, aims to pressure ad agencies to drop fossil fuel clients due to their outsized contributions to the climate crisis. The group today announced that 1,000 agencies have now signed its pledge to turn down work with fossil fuel clients. “Greenwashing by polluters is still rampant, and it's built up a skepticism in consumers,” Meisel said. BP launched its “Beyond Petroleum” campaign nearly 25 years ago, Meisel noted, but its business model has not transformed in the ambitious way that the ads suggested. Instead, BP posted record profits from its oil and gas business last year and reversed its plans to cut back on oil production. “There's a poisoning-the-well effect that comes with the big polluters making really misleading claims,” Meisel said. Despite continued pressure from Clean Creatives and other climate activism groups, all the major advertising holding companies have continued to work alongside oil majors as they expand production beyond what would keep emissions below the threshold agreed upon by world governments in 2015. IPG-owned McCann is currently re-pitching for Saudi Aramco, according to DeSmog; and Havas, which was seen by many as the holding company with the strongest commitment to climate, last year won the Shell media account—leaving activists feeling that the industry has chosen profit over a livable planet. “If we deal with the problem of these big polluters making claims that are so far out of step with their behavior, it opens up space for there to be more nuanced conversation,” Meisel said.

Sustainability News

Most of Adland Is Crickets on Climate. But That May Still Be Productive

Greenwashing regulations and activism could make way for higher industry standards

Kathryn Lundstrom

About

Subscriptions

Events

Publications

WORK SMARTER - LEARN, GROW AND BE INSPIRED.

Subscribe today!

Kathryn Lundstrom