This week we are talking about green advertising and how it relates to the natural world. It was upsetting, yet not surprising, to read that to create a “green” product is an oxymoron because no product is actually green. Corbett says that “the only Green product is the one that is not produced.” At the heart of these advertisements, the message is still to buy more, while making the false claim that these purchases have little ecological effect (Corbett, p. 157).
Did you know that the USDA’s requirements for a meat product to be considered “natural” is only applied after slaughter? Thus, it disregards the animals diet packed full of GMOs and growth hormones. This also does not put into account that many factory farmed animals are exposed to pesticides and chemical fertilizers. As seen above, Tyson falsely claimed that their chicken was “all natural”. The reason they were able to get away with such a claim is that government agencies do not closely monitor corporations that try to advertise for “all natural” products. On the other hand, corporations are monitored vigorously when labeling themselves as organic. When something is labeled as organic, we know this is legal assurance. Labeling products as “natural” is just a cheaper and more convenient way for companies to gain more profit from having “ethical” standards, and this is one way greenwashing takes place (Hemmelgarn, 2016).
Going forward we see that greenwashing is an advertising tactic that uses phrases like “100% natural” and “all-natural” to sell products that are anything but natural. They also package their products with “earthy” colors; especially green, which is associated with organic and true Green products. The consumer is tricked into buying it because we see the color green as representing health, vitality, and environmental.
– Mattie Martin