Last week HSBC became the latest brand to have its ads banned for greenwashing by the UK’s Advertising Standards Authority (ASA).
Advertising has an important role to play in influencing consumer behaviour and brands are increasingly keen to show off their sustainability credentials, but as we’ve seen over the past year, there’s plenty of scope for error.
The ads in question gave the misleading impression that HSBC has an overall positive effect on the environment, by highlighting green initiatives like tree planting, without acknowledging its financing of fossil fuel projects.
‘In the war against corporate guff, the ASA’s ruling is a rare victory,’ wrote Henry Mance for the Financial Times. ‘It should mean that companies can no longer cherry-pick random actions as if they were citations for the Nobel peace prize.’
And it’s not just enabling banks and fuel-guzzling airlines falling foul of the watchdog. In January, alt-milk brand Oatly was banned for ambiguous and unsubstantiated statements about the lower environmental impact of its products, and a poster for Lipton Ice Tea was jettisoned for a confusing ‘100% recycled’ claim.
The following month, drinks brand Innocent was ruled to have mislead consumers by exaggerating the environmental benefit of its products, and more recently, Unilever-owned Persil was penalised for failing to substantiate its ‘kinder to our planet’ claim.
‘We’re signalling that we intend to go further, to crack down on misleading and socially irresponsible environmental advertising,’ said the ASA in a statement in September 2021.
While the watchdog won’t be able to erase greenwashing completely (sponsorship, for example, isn't held to the same standards as advertising), its clampdown on disingenuous drivel is something we can get behind.