Advertising often comes under fire these days. Advertising stretches the truth or even just lies, and that is why we hate it. Simply, advertising is a way to push a project, often one we don't want or even need. Therefore, everyone is wary of advertisers telling us the next way to perfect our skin, or the next phone we need, or the next line of shoes we "must have". But in the attacks against advertising and the rising "green" and "sustainable" movement, are we clever enough to notice the same effects of advertising in green products? Take a look at this Mazda ad from 2012.
Notice anything past the cuddly Lorax? I certainly hope so.
This is an example of the lowest form of greenwashing possible. This advertisement is just ridiculous. First off, we should remember what the advertisement is actually for: a Mazda car with higher miles per gallon. Yes, it is beter than a car with lower miles per gallon, but it's still a car; it still emits tons upon tons of CO2. It is not good for the environment no matter the miles per gallon it has. However, Mazda is trying to distract us from this fact. Instead, Mazda shows its cartoon car driving through the wilderness to create a link between the car and nature, in an effort to deliberately greenwash its viewers and make the car appear sustainable.
Secondly, what exactly is SkyActive Technology? The ad doesn't offer any kind of explanation, except to somehow link it to sustainability. The words "SkyActive Technology are repeated over and over again, in a vein effort to give them meaning - but they have none. Likewise, the car is supposedly awarded the "Truffula Tree Friendly" award. Again, this means absolutely nothing. The car is not environmentally friendly in the real world, nor the Lorax's world. Mazda is making a extremely poor effort to make their product seem sustainable.
It's obvious that Mazda is not making any effort to be transparent here, or even make sense. Mazda's only goal in this respect is to "greenwash" it's viewers - to make its product seem more green than it actually is. Mazda does not back up any of its claims. We have no idea what SkyActive Technology is, or how it makes the car more environmental, and perhaps worthy of the "Truffula Tree Friendly" award. I rated this ad on the Green Washing Index and gave it a 4.9/5. (Higher being worse.)
Works Cited:Mazda. "2012 Mazda - Dr. Seuss' The Lorax Spot 45 Sec." YouTube. YouTube, 20 Feb. 2012. Web. 01 Aug. 2013. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gjRisj1vaDo>.
Carty, Sharon Silke. "Greenwashed Car Ads Make People Feel Good About Polluting."The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 20 Apr. 2012. Web. 01 Aug. 2013. <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/20/green-cars-ads-polluting_n_1440830.html>.
It is ridiculous! Someone ought to ask Mazda what exactly is SKYACTIVE Technology. It'll be like a boost of 2 mpg. Agreed that there is NO TRANSPARENCY here whatsoever. Fix "Vein" to "vain" under the SkyActive Technology paragraph.
ReplyDelete-Jason
The issues with the environment are far from comical. Thanks for bringing this to our attention!.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you are saying on how the awards are really nothing. It is a humorous commercial and it was cleaver to connect it to the movie: the Lorax. In some ways I can see why Mazda decided to use this movie as reference to earth. I guess you can that it is just a humorous advertisement. With my advertisement I can see some lack of transparency and a lot of green washing.
ReplyDeleteThanks for showing us this monstrosity. It's sad that the Lorax movie signed itself off to Mazda, The Lorax being one of the most or maybe even the most iconic environmentalist picture book.
ReplyDelete-Shannon, http://sustainabilityinthisworld.blogspot.com/
I totally agree with you!!Check out at my blog also..http://thegreentimesblog.blogspot.com/
ReplyDeleteI disagree with you entirely. This ad isn't meant to be serious, but rather something cute that would lead to people remembering it. If Mazda put the emblem on their car then that would be ridiculous, but in an ad that is obviously all about the cartoon is something different. It may slightly be considered green washing, but i would give it maybe a 2.5 rather than a 4.9.
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely ridiculous! Thanks for uncovering this humorous commercial. This just further backs up the problem that I have with the lack of specificity in green-labeling.
ReplyDelete