Flack Attack

PR Watch has never shied away from controversy, and our second quarter 1999 issue was no exception. It drew strong criticism from three individuals who have been involved in next year's "Green Olympics" in Australia and who took exception to Sharon Beder's critique of the role that Greenpeace has played in promoting the Olympics as an environmental showcase. Their letters appear in this issue.

Beder in turn replied with a new article, titled "From Green Warriors to Greenwashers" and with the critique of former Greenpeace International CEO Paul Gilding that appears as this issue's cover story.

Given the sharp-tongued nature of this exchange, it is important to point out that both Beder and Greenpeace have a long track record of activism in defense of the environment. The issues at stake in this debate are serious and deserve careful scrutiny.

As PR Watch has often revealed, the environmental movement is suffering under a two-pronged attack from chemical, genetic engineering, mining and other interests threatened by environmental reform.On the one hand, a "bad cop" approach is used to create and subsidize anti-environmental attack dogs, from the self-named "wise use" movement of Ron Arnold to "sound science" front groups like Elizabeth Whelan's American Council on Science and Health. These industry-funded groups paint themselves as voices of reason and moderation in contrast to the "terrorism" of environmental extremists and fearmongers.

This "bad cop" assault puts environmentalists on the defensive, while industry's "good cop" tactics attempt to re-define environmentalism in terms acceptable to global capitalism. Companies want to appear green and socially responsible, so they use their PR experts to form "partnerships" with environmentalists to produce "win-win solutions" that claim to resolve conflicts. For the parties involved, the "win-win" might be real in a bottom-line dollars and cents way: companies use their newly greened image to sell more cars or hamburgers or genetically engineered corn or Olympic advertising; big environmental groups tout major reforms in their fundraising letters and proposals to the Pew Charitable Trusts and others that reward such deals.

Re-read Sharon Beder's articles in the previous PR Watch, the letters in this issue, and her response and decide for yourself the reality behind the Summer 2000 Olympics: Are they a green victory or greenwashing?

Beder's related cover story suggests that one reason why environmental groups are being co-opted is that many of their former leaders are finding "greener" pastures as corporate environmental consultants. Most environmental activists are unpaid volunteers. Those that are employed by environmental groups, with a few exceptions, earn much less than they could working for big business. However, some green leaders have found that they can profit handsomely in the corporate world by trading on their knowledge, connections and environmentalist reputations.

As this century closes, the green movement is definitely floundering, not because public support is lacking or ecological crises are solved, but because corporations have learned how to tame and turn aside fundamental environmental reforms. As Mark Dowie argued in his 1995 book, Losing Ground, the green movement needs to examine and criticize itself, or it will become merely a clever marketing hook and even less relevant to the problems we face in the 21st century.