I'm just not quite sure where to begin this this advert. Did the creatives not check the facts of Apples operations or claims? The spot claims products, offices, operations, data centres, are or will be carbon neutral by 2030 yet make no mention in the advert that this is only possible through buying significant offsets. They talk about shipping as being 95% less than aviation, but this is a fact of physics, not something that should be attributed to their efforts, their overall movement of products to market has not been reduced by 95% They claim all their data centres are carbon neutral, which is utter rubbish, data centres only report their scope 2, and the massive increase in water usage from Apples use of AI is not mentioned. Lots of other statements in this advert to challenge. Please, please please can advertising stop being part of the problem. We cannot allow brands to continue to Ad-Wash the public into believing that everything will be carbon neutral and therefore totally ok to consume indiscriminately. Aside from this, I feel like the ad falls foul of the recent ASA updated rules. Come on advertising, you can do better. Jonathan Wise Naomi Ní Shíocháin🕊️ Zoe Cohen Ali Sheridan Neil Russell-Bates (he/him) Gerry McGovern Cindy Forde Aerin ☁️ Clouds Erin Remblance Gabi Kay Thomas Panton Rupert Read Rob Mayhew Jon Alexander Andrew Simms Purpose Disruptors Lisa Merrick-Lawless Rachel Smy Keiren O'Brien Alexis Eyre Tim Riedel #greenwashing #adwashing https://lnkd.in/eabPX9gv
2030 Status | Mother Nature | Apple
https://www.youtube.com/
🤮 🤮 Aside from the ghastly stereotype of the big, black earth mama, there's no mention of the model itself, spending marketing billions to addict people to 'swag' they don't need and to feel socially inadequate if they haven't chucked that away and brought a new tech gismo within a couple of years of purchase. Humans must be vigorously hooked onto as many tech devices and apps as possible to facilitate the biggest ever enterprise of colonisation - the human mind. Unless we can retain and rebuild our ability to think independently of this ubiquitous brainwashing, we won't be able build the models we need for systemic transformation.
I am surprised that they would publish an advert so peppered with falsehoods - marketing individuals/companies should take at least some of the blame for the crisis because they never questioned the 'facts'. HOWEVER I totally applaud the concept that Mother Nature/Earth should be a (clearly invisible) stakeholder (or 'shareholder'?) on EVERY board or at every office meeting globally...from now on.... the first and last point on every agenda should be: 1. Reminder: every suggestion/action point at this meeting must consider whether it causes detriment or benefit to our one shared beautiful Earth. (Last point) Are we compliant with Agenda Point 1? It would definitely change the mindsets of those going into meetings...?
I think you hit the nail on the head Viki; when mega-brands like this give the impression to their customers that everything is just fine, that has huge influence and will help those customers to assume that they can carry on buying Apple goods with a clear conscience. Released on the same day as the Guardian article explaining that we have crossed 6 out of 9 planetary boundaries thanks to our avarice for consumerism and stand on the brink. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/sep/13/earth-well-outside-safe-operating-space-for-humanity-scientists-find
It's sickening but absolutely typical from Apple. With their planned obsolescence model, they do so much damage to the environment. And the advertising industry itself is more damaging than the oil industry, so an ad like this is perfectly normal, standard output for a bunch of 'creatives' whose very essence and purpose is to lie and drive over-consumption.
A key point about offsetting: it is generally done by planting trees. And tragically, many trees are…going to burn. Vast numbers of Microsoft’s ‘net zero’ trees burnt in California two years ago. Apple’s trees may well end up no different.
There was so much hype yesterday about this advert. As an ad lover, I love it. The creativity, the humour, the acting. But from a sustainability perspective, it is refreshing to read a more objective reaction and critique of their claims. I was particularly surprised by the water vs air transportation data point. That is misleading. Stating a reduction in water use without providing a reference as to what their total water usage is, is misleading. They have probably included those details, I hope, in their actual report, still most people will simply watch the advert and not question it. Kudos to Apple for the changes they are making, no business can shift overnight. But keep your comms transparent.
I loved it, but felt an immediate distrust and wanted to check every fact. Not totally easy to grasp all relevant parts for the general public and, of course, a big problem when they basically say “We’ve solved it - continue buying from us!” Wish they could use their emotional storytelling and be bold to include messages of reduce, reuse, repair - tapping into the core of resource efficiency. ♻️ Also some about how to recover their old products so they are handled as safely and environmental friendly as possible at end-of-life. What is your take? Russ Avery FRSA Sune Nightingale Jurate Miliute-Plepiene Sebastian Holmström
Yes, Viki, Adland should do better and see through this well polished ad. I too watched and felt very uncomfortable about some of these claims. Much to my horror I'm looking at my LinkedIn feed and seeing that this film has been posted multiple times with Apple being applauded! The claims are not transparent and the carbon neutrality claims don't mention offsetting, so this lulls customers into a false sense of security with Apple. It is misleading and therefore another example of greenwashing.
Victoria, are there any significant companies we should be looking to as role models? Or better still, can we create a hypothetical role model company as a composite of the best of breed components from existing companies. This would be a very useful aspirational benchmark (which could be updated periodically). Kudos and recognition to companies who contribute a component to this hypothetical role model company would create competition towards being best of breed.
EXECUTIVE CREATIVE DIRECTOR
11moI was bored out of my gourd by this greenwashing load of old bollocks - and sickened by the sycophantic plaudits it received from a bunch of berks on LinkedIn who wouldn’t know a great idea if their life depended on it. Just think about the briefing. Planner:’We need to try and convince people that Apple is doing the right thing for the environment.’ Creative Team: (Five minutes in) What about having the environment (Mother Nature) turn up at the office, so we can tell her how good we are? Planner:’Love it. Lunch??’ This. Is. Not. Great. It’s. A. Facile. First. Thought.