“OK, team, here’s the brief. We have a planet. Beautiful blue ball. Happy inhabitants threatened with a global emissions crisis that could cook the whole thing like an egg. We need to brand a planetary climate treaty. A deal that will galvanize everyone from CEO’s to little old ladies into international action to save the day! It’s the pitch of a lifetime!! So what do we call it? I need ideas, people!”

“Uh… how about Kyoto…”

“Kyoto?? What the hell does that have to do with anything? Who in their green mind is going to rally behind the name of an obscure Japanese town that doesn’t even have a Whole Foods™ market? You’re FIRED! And I need a drink…”

I know branding can’t solve everything, but it’s no surprise that the headline ‘Canada withdraws from Kyoto’ is met with a shrug. Sounds like a failed minor military campaign from WW2. “Sorry, chief – we pulled out. It was just too boring there.”

It would have sounded much more dramatic if Canada had to announce they were pulling out of the “Save-Our-Planet Agreement”. Or that Harper moved to block the “Global Disaster Aversion Treaty”.

Nothing against the fine people of Kyoto, but even they must be feeling the backwash from the negative press the name of their fine city is receiving.

Now we have Durban. (“Rhymes with turban! Could be catchy….?” No?”) And yet another deal in the making. Next year, negotiations will begin on a new, legally binding accord that will be signed by 2015 and come into force by 2020.

So we have about 3 years to come up with a better brand to save the world.

Don Draper, where are you?

I generally don’t like to just up and crap all over a piece of well-intentioned creative, but in this case I have to make an exception. Pre-apologies to any hard-working agency or client-side types I may offend.

Let’s begin by looking at Clover Leaf’s strategy here. Presumably, someone at head office has been getting heat from articles like this one which point out that Clover Leaf came in 11th out of 14 major Canadian canned tuna brands ranked in sustainability. So, they do what many industries do in cases like this; band together and create a business-led partnership under which they can publicize their progress as they attempt to maintain their current profit model with as little interruption as possible. For Clover Leaf, this is called the International Seafood Sustainability Foundation. I’ll leave it up to you to fish around and see for yourself if the ISSF is more than a well-intentioned delay tactic. Purely as a strategy though, an ad that describes the work this foundation does, and Clover Leaf’s connection to it would be a good thing. Unfortunately, this ad, in 350 words or so, does very little of that.

Design-wise, the ad is clean enough, though the un-captioned photos are completely meaningless (What kind of tuna is that? Who are those people? Why should I care?)

Regarding the content itself, the headline sets the tone. “Good for you. Good for us all.” Really? OK, what’s ‘good for us all’ in the copy? “Clover Leaf is committed to leading the way in preserving the world’s aquatic resources.” Over-promise much? To truly preserve aquatic resources, Clover Leaf should lead the way by shutting their doors. STOP FISHING! But of course, their whole business is built on taking fish stocks and feeding them to us in little cans. So that probably won’t happen.

Don’t get me wrong, I like eating tuna. Right from the can, even. But I cannot swallow another fluffy line that promises something the company cannot possibly deliver.

Try “Clover Leaf is working hard to evolve our fishing practices to reduce our impact on fish stocks around the world.” You can have that one for free.

Here’s another gem: “We are committed through our leadership and our actions to the effective management of ocean resources for generations to come.” What actions? There is no mention of any specific change in fishing practice or policy in the whole ad. And now they want to protect not only fish, but ‘all ocean resources’? Gee thanks. I can sleep now.

And to finish off, “‘Quality and taste every time’ is more than our mantra – it’s our commitment to you and future generations.” Did these guys just step out of the 70′s? Someone should tell them that today’s consumers want facts, not meaningless taglines.

Try building on 100 years of trust. Tell folks about the ISSF’s latest resolution to support the full closure of the purse seine fishery to reduce mortality of Big Eye Tuna. Heck, maybe explain that there actually ARE different species of tuna, some more threatened than others… ANYTHING!  Argh. I could be here all night trying to rewrite this pile of fluff.

The end result is an ad that says nothing, but tries to leave consumers with the impression that Clover Leaf is taking sustainability seriously. That is the very definition of greenwash, and it taints all the hard work of the brands and marketers who are working to make a genuine difference.

Clover Leaf, I may be black-listed forever from working on your brand because of this article. But if you continue to treat sustainability like just another marketing buzzword, that’s fine with me.

Want to do it right? Drop me a line.

P.S. If anyone out there wants to taste a real can of sustainable tuna, check out these guys.

In trying to live more sustainability, the occasional U-Turn is inevitable.  It seems not that long ago that I was reading about the screw top (or ‘Stelvin Closure, as they prefer to call it) and the plastic cork as being more sustainable improvements in wine closure technology. Not so, says Citizen Group Executive Creative Director Robin Raj.

For the mighty cork tree is a model of sustainable provision, offering up its cork bark to swarthy harvesters season after season, providing the largest export for the country of Portugal. Aluminum closures, on the other hand, are resource-intensive to produce and difficult to recycle. Don’t even get him started on the plastic plug.

Raj showed us a series of online videos. The quirky ‘Garth Lockwood, Sommellier’ series, example above, was only part of the story. The campaign also included a nicely-crafted ‘credibility’ piece (video below) for use in more corporate environs. The overall effect is a campaign that will likely resonate well with industry and consumers alike.

Overall I would have to say this rates on my ‘Wish-I’d-Done-That’ pile, and I applaud the client’s willingness to step outside the potentially stuffy world of oenophelia. To that end, breaking up the messaging into ‘credibility’ and ‘entertainment’ silos was a smart one, and a strategy worth keeping in mind for many green marketers. Cheers!

I envy early advertisers who simply had to sell new and improved soap. ‘Gets clothes cleaner‘ is a much easier proposition than ‘Biomass co-firing helps reduce the total C02 emissions per kilowatt hour of power produced, even when emissions from harvest and shipping are taken into account‘.

Such is the cross we green marketers now have to bear. But there are some pretty cool tools in the box to help. Like Illustrator and Photoshop. And with some forethought, (see the 5 tips below), you can get your readers through the stats wide awake and looking for more.

Last year I had the pleasure of working with Ottawa environmental agency TerraVeritas on a communication piece for Drax Power, one of Great Britain’s biggest energy producing plants. TerraVeritas is a a science company dedicated to investigating environmental and sustainability claims. That means they do all the hard work to dig up accurate, comparative stats to tell the story. (Which was of critical importance to me, as I was tasked with selling the benefits of adding biomass to a COAL-FIRED plant! Eeeek!) My job was to help translate these complex issues into digestible copy and images for a 16-page booklet called Field to Furnace – Displacing Coal with Biomass.

Some illustrations were designed to show a bigger picture; like describing the difference between CO2 that is in our current carbon cycle vs. additional CO2; or illustrating the benefits to farmers, job creation, shipping in one image (at the top of this article). For others I used Illustrator’s graphing tool to accurately display comparative numbers for easy interpretation at a glance.

I learned a lot in the process, not least of which was a healthy respect for the science behind the numbers. If you are tasked with illustrating scientific concepts, here are a few more things to ponder for clients and creatives alike.

1. Think ahead to future uses and formats. If you’re going to all the trouble to do a 4″ x 4″ illustration for a web site, it’s probably just as easy to make it 8″ x 8″ at 300 DPI just in case it ever needs to be used it for print. Better yet, use a vector program such as Illustrator, which is resolution-independent. Video is another consideration. Building your files in layers will make it much easier to animate later.

2. Listen to the Eggheads. Don’t cheat on size and scale in comparative charts just to make your art look better. If something simply won’t fit, or will be too small to see, include an asterisk and add a disclaimer to the copy. Likewise for clients. No cheating the numbers to make your message rosier!

3. Consider the scientific acumen of your audience. If you are presenting to a board of PhD’s, you may wish to eschew graphic frippery entirely. For your average audience-in-a-hurry, make the most important points easy to see. Clients, think about what your audience may already know that will help your designer streamline the information.

4. You don’t always have to look slick or scientific. Sometimes hand-drawn or hand-written info can be the most powerful. Especially when you want to convey things in process, or show the human side of the equation.

5. Make sure you really understand the concepts. As a designer, it’s not enough to let the client do all the thinking, even if they are scientists. Wrap your head around the context for the message. Try to see it in a different way. Pare it down to its key elements and wow your client with an interpretation that’s fresh and accurate.

You might as well make friends with data. These days you can’t even sell laundry soap without putting some numbers through the wringer.

The 5th Annual ImagePower® Green Brands Survey is out, with some encouraging and surprising results. First, the environment is not going away, despite our best attempts to kill it. With over 9000 people polled in eight countries (Australia, Brazil, China, France, Germany, India and the United Kingdom) this study concludes that overall, concern for the environment is up 3.5%. And the growth is coming from some very interesting places.

Emerging economies are the new eco marketing goldmines.

While cost remains the biggest hurdle to buying green in mature markets like Australia, France, Germany, and the United Kingdom, the environment still trumps the economy as the issue of greatest concern in the emerging economies of India and Brazil. While 30 percent of all survey respondents plan to spend more on green products next year, in Brazil, China, and India that number rises to more than 70 percent. In China and India, this is a 9 and 3 percent increase, respectively, over 2009. HELLO makers of green products!! Massive Market ALERT!! In China, confusing labeling makes purchases a struggle; shoppers can’t figure out which products are truly more ecofriendly. I guess their packaging communications problems aren’t limited to bad English translations. Seriously though, China could really benefit from a well-managed certification system. Green certification agencies like Canada’s Terrachoice (managers of Canada’s successful ECO-LOGO program) have their work cut out for them.

Message from the world to corporations: Stop poisoning us.

Across the board, consumers want to buy from environmentally responsible companies. And their #1 concern: reducing toxics. It has become the cost of entry for brands in most markets, the survey says. As Google becomes a global verb, the transparency of toxic ingredients, manufacturing processes and disposal issues will only increase. Water conservation takes second place in Australia, Brazil, China, and India, while consumers in France, Germany, and the United States focus on the use of recycled materials. British consumers show the most interest in reducing the amount of packaging used, ranking it second behind toxin removal.

The Green Briefs Two Bits:

While this survey focuses on global brands and attitudes, there is learning for local green brands as well.  The good news is that consumers generally trust green advertising, especially in developing markets. But people decide for themselves what ‘green’ means, so it’s up to you to find out what your customers value most. Clear communication and transparency will always be in style. And best of all, we’re on the side that’s winning. So stay the course. The world will beat a path to our door.

In an effort to stay at the forefront of environmental product communication, Unicycle Creative is proud to launch a new worldwide standard for eco-labeling, the Dead Polar Bear Scale (DPB)
“It’s a way for consumers to really know what they’re buying into from a climate perspective,” Says Unicycle President Lorne Craig, “We’re all killing polar bears of course… now we can use that knowledge to help adjust our buying behaviour.”
The DPB rating was developed using some of the latest intelligence on eco-labeling. A recent U.K. survey suggested that labeling information presented as plain text was much more difficult for consumers to  understand. More than half (56%) correctly identified the efficiency of a fictional new car called “Marko” when the data was shown in a colour-coded chart, compared with less than 31% when the information was presented in plain text.
As of January 2009, California and Vermont both made it mandatory that new cars sold there be labeled for climate impact. Both states use a black-and-white environmental performance label.
In the U.K., the British motor industry introduced a colour-coded label, in use at an estimated 93% of U.K. car dealerships.
“We use colours too,” Says Craig “The Five DPB rating is blood red, while the One DPB is rendered in classic eco green.”

Regulatory agencies or vendors interested in licensing the DPB Climate Labeling Scale can contact Lorne Craig via email.

Thanks to Sustainable Life Media for the original story thread.

You copy on both sides of the paper. You don’t print your e-mails. You pour reclaimed rainwater water through old coffee grounds. BUT YOU CAN STILL DO MORE!! Yes, until you consider how many grains of toner you waste on each and every letter you print, you are not worthy.
Meet ECO-Font, by Spranq, which claims to reduce ink, toner, cartridge usage and presumably, designer guilt.
“Appealing ideas are often simple,” says their web site. “How much of a letter can be removed while maintaining readability? After extensive testing with all kinds of shapes, the best results were achieved using small circles. After lots of late hours (and coffee) this resulted in a font that uses up to 20% less ink.”
Some bloggers who are much more technical than I, have calculated that at sizes below 8.5pt  the small holes may just fill with ink or toner, and not save anything. Furthermore, the more complex design of each letter could result in longer ‘time-to-RIP’, (the print plate preparation process) which might add costs at prepress time.
But hey, the font is free, and as the first of its kind, I’d have to say it’s worth a try. Even if it does look a bit like a bad Hollywood movie marquee at larger sizes.

Download it from their website. And let me know how the little holes work for you.

Coming Soon: The  Dotskipper™ Ballpoint Pen – Writes a microscopically-dashed line that saves 50% on ink. At least until you leave it in the glove box of your car for 4 years and it dries into a useless plastic stick.

If you have a point of view on these wines or any organic alcoholic beverages you think we should test, please let us know. Drop us a comment, below.