According to “CorpWatch: Greenwash Fact Sheet” article (2001), “Shell, the world’s third largest oil company, continues its clever but misleading ad series ‘Profits or Principles’ which touts Shell’s commitment to renewable energy sources and features photos of lush green forests” (para. 13). As in the above example, Shell’s greenwash has been acted out over a few decades, and includes destroying the environment, destruction of evidence with money, and faking advertisement for their profit. In “How Royal Dutch shell Whitewash Led To Greenwash,” Donovan (2007), writes “Shell fined $19.75 million for oil spill from Martinez Refinery, settles Martinez Refinery dumping suit for $3 Million, release of chemical pollutants at Shell Texas Deer Park complex, Shell pipeline ruptured in Washington, Groundwater contamination by shell in USA, and Unauthorized venting and flaring of gas” (para. 11.). However, a recent version of Shell’s advertisement has been issued because it is a fake advertisement for their image with the public. So the Royal Dutch Shell Group deceived the public. Therefore, the government and public should make several solutions to prevent the greenwashing.
Greenwash is “a term that is used to describe the act of misleading consumers regarding the environmental practice of a company or the environmental benefits of a product or service” (Wikipedia, n.d.). Since advanced mass media, company has increasingly seized an advertisement opportunity to announce and public relations for their image and brand power. In the 1960s and 1970s, greenwashing has started to appear in newspapers and magazines. According to CorpWatch (2001), “In the year 1969 alone, public utilities spent more than $300 million on advertising more than eight times what they spent on the anti-pollution research they were touting in their ads” (para. 4). Then greenwashing advertisements became even more numerous and more sophisticated in the 1970s and 1980s. In 1993 Shell was ejected from Nigeria because their refinery emissions in South Africa contributed to the country’s global warming.
First of all, Shell needs more intensive regulation and stronger laws. In the meantime, Shell has been pointed out that Shell company is clear environmental; however, they have polluted in various ways such oil spill problem, rupturing pipeline, polluting groundwater, and flaring gas and poisoning the people, etc. According to Rowell’s (2006) article,“In Shell’s Sustainability report, there are pages and pages about what Shell is doing to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. However the company also admits it is heavily involved in the Canadian Tar / oil sands project. This is where oil is extracted from sand, a hugely energy intensive and dirty project which will be devastating to the local and global environment” (para 9). As in the above example, many environmental groups’ opinions have also been ignored by Shell’s installing the platform project. These forms have been repeated during a few decades. So, government needs to control it because there is nothing like government control. Therefore, government needs to increase regulation or negotiate with Shell about how environmental problems can be solved to prevent destroying the environment. Also, government needs to upgrade the law to limit oil pumping, but they need to well control them because shell is one of biggest companies and they could affect oil prices. So government should consider that and solve together interdependently.
Second, the public should know about Shell’s greenwashing through mass media. Shell’s recent one of advertisement was issued. According to Bruno’s (2000) article, “The ad is pretty, of course, and it sounds reasonable, caring and honest. But Shell has a history of “greenwash” green themed advertising and public relations aimed at presenting an environmentally responsible image. So let’s take a deeper look at the ‘clouding the Air’ ad” (para. 2). As explained in Bruno’s article, Shell used a clear sky picture on the background of their advertisement. Also, in one other advertisement made consumers dizzy. According to Donovan’s article (2007), “The Shell campaign in question is about the most blatant and hypocritical example of treating the public as fools. In its advertising graphics, flowers are seen rising from a shell oil refinery. In reality the emissions are rather more deadly in nature” (para. 10). In the above examples, public is dazzled by Shell’s blinding advertisement. This kind of greenwashing, furthermore, hid with Shell’s settlements lawsuit. However, we can prvent this by announcing it on the Internet. According to Greenhouse Market Mania (n.d.), “There goal is to prevent public opinion from turning against them, as happened numerous times in the past decade” (para. 1). They are afraid of the public because it relates to their profits. This strong way that public power can be shown, can change their greenwashing. So, if Shell’s negative side is announced to the public on any mass media, their reputation will be down and also consumers will be decreased.
Third, to prevent Shell’s greenwashing, they should change themselves. Also, the public and government should encourage Shell, for example by using the other green companies or composing an atmosphere in which many companies go to green. According to today’s environmental issue, many companies are trying become green. For example many car companies are developing Hybrid car, electronic companies are making product that certify energy efficiency, and in many other various different fields people are studying to make green products. Agreeably to those cases, government can encourage Royal Dutch Shell to reduce the pollution and be careful with their burning at refineries. According to “Friends of the Earth: Shell clean up in Durban” article (n.d.). “Local Shell mangers in South Africa ignored calls for the pipes to be replaced even though evidence showed that the pipelines had 50% rust” (para. 11). And many other places had troubled with environmental destruction with their pipeline problems. The Royal Dutch Shell needs to admit to their environmental problem. And they need to change it to fit into green practice. Also, they need to be aware many customers prefer green companies and products. According to “Corp Watch: USA: Top 10 Greenwashing Companies of 1999” article (2000), “A 1999 Cone/Roper Survey found that Americans are more likely to conduct business with companies supporting strong causes such as environmental protection and 83 percent of respondents say they have a more positive image of a company supporting a cause they care about” (para. 4). Therefore, they need to know that unless they change their environmental sector, then they will lose their consumers. Also, government needs to compose an atmosphere that encourage going green.
Some opponents of Shell’s greenwashing say that Royal Dutch Shell actually has been contributed in various fields. They say Shell tried sustainable to make change their image to clean. According to “Shell.com: Shell wins social reporting award” article (2000), there is an “Important contribution the Shell Group is making in pioneering the way large corporations report their performance and impact in economic, social and environmental terms alongside traditional financial reporting” (para. 2). Also, Shell of China coorperative is working and developing natural gas, alternative energy, and trying a nonprofit enterprise in China. However, one remarkable thing is they invest only 7% of their entire profit even though they are the third largest company and richest company in the world. Of course they are a global group, and they are investing in various fields, for example, medical prosperity, education, development of community, etc. But in many places they have still suffered oil spill problems, pipeline ruptures, settlement of dumping suits, etc. They can spend on and reduce the environmental problems. Therefore, Shell needs to spend and invest on the environmental practices to prevent destruction of environment.
In conclusion, Royal Dutch Shell worked and tried to change their image. They destroyed the environment, made fake advertisements, and tried to settle their opponents’ suits. Therefore, government and public power controlled and was shown to them. Government needs to control the regulation of laws about advertising, paying fines, and destroying the environment to prevent their negative working. And Shell’s behavior needs to become shown and announced to the public through any of media place. Also, Shell needs to the number of aware that many customers want to go green and unless they can’t go green, consumers will be decreased. Furthermore, they need to spend and invest more in environmental fields than in their profitable investment. The above solutions will be working correctly to change from Shell’s greenwashing to green. Then, through Shell’s social responsibility, Shell will be recognized as a company of reliability and morality.
Reference
CorpWatch. (2001, March 22). Greenwash Fact sheet. Retrived April 24, 2008, from http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=242
Donovan, J (2007, July 9). How Royal Dutch Shell Whitewash led to Greenwash. HULIQ.com. Retrived April 24, 2008 from http://www.huliq.com/26761/how-royal-dutch-shell-whitewash-led-to-greenwash
Rowell, A (2006, May 12). More Shell Greenwash. OIL CHANGE INTERNATIONAL. Retrieved April 24, 2008, from http://priceofoil.org/2006/05/12/more-shell-greenwash/
Bruno, K (2000, November 15). Shell: Clouding the Issue. CorpWatch. Retrieved April 24, 2008, from http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=218&printsafe=1
Greenhouse Market Mania. (n.d.). The Climate Greenwash Vanguard: Shell and BPAmoco. Retrieved April 24, 2008, from http://www.corporateeurope.org/greenhouse/greenwash.html
CorpWatch. (2000, Novewmber 20). Shell’s Climate Greenwash. Retrieved april 24, 2008, from http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=925
USA: Top 10 Greenwashing Companies if 1999. (2000, March 30). CorpWatch. Retrieved April 24, 2008, from http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=331
Shell clean up in Durban. (n.d.). Friends of the Earth Retrieved April 24, 2008, from http://www.foe.co.uk/campaigns/corporates/success_stories/shell_durban.html
Shell wins social reporting award. (2000, May 4). Shell.com. Retrieved April 24, 2008, from http://www.shell.com/home/content/investor-en/news_and_library/press_releases/2000/shellwinssocial_10101500.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment