Posts filed under 'Interesting Articles'

My First Meme, Letters to My Younger Self: A Lesson From Susie Buffet

Today, Kivi Leroux Miller at NonProfit Communications participated in a continuing blog posting style called a meme, titled: Meme: Excerpt from a Book on My Desk.

Until today, I did not know what a meme was or is. I’m pretty excited though, now that I know what it is, as I’m always looking for new ways to evolve the style of blog posts. (Another recent favorite is Bamboo Project’s 31 Day Comment Challenge Series. Today is Day 6 of the Challenge.)

*****************

A meme is like an internet chain letter, with depth. One blogger posts a topic or call to action, then tags 5-10 other people to follow suite and add to the ‘meme.’ This being my first tag in a meme, I am participating. Plus, I was pretty excited about the book nearest me…

Here is what I am supposed to do:

1. Pick up the nearest book.
2. Open to page 123.
3. Find the fifth sentence.
4. Post the next three sentences.
5. Tag five people, and acknowledge who tagged you.

It’s titled: What I Know Now, Letters to My Younger Self, written by a collaboration of accomplished and amazing women. Contributers include Madeleine Albright, Maya Angelou, Ann Curry, Olmypia Dukakis, and many more! This book is great, because women need role models and mentors. This book offers just a glimpse into some of the more important LIFE lessons we learn along our journey.

When I’m finished reading, I plan on writing my own letter to my older self, and  store it away to read at a later date. And another letter to my younger self, that I hope to one day pass on to a future daughter. This idea is what I’d like to forward in my version of the meme.

Not wanting to be a complete rule breaker though…this is what I found:

Page 123 was part of the letter Jane Bryant Quinn, author and columnist, writes to herself about parenting and what’s she learned from her kids. But, I preferred to share one of my favorite excerpts from the book instead, written by Susie Buffet, daughter of Warren Buffet, written back to her 17 year old self, about her admiration for her mother.

“Empathy has led her [Susie's mother] to become extraordinarily accepting of others, but it’s also what makes her comfortable with acting unconventionally…Empathy doesn’t have to lead you to the routes she [mom] will follow, which may be a temptation, given your resemblance to her. The important thing is that it becomes part of your compass, too.”

If you wrote a letter to yourself, how old would you be and what would be your message?

I tag:

Britt Bravo

Cool People Care

SocialCitizen

Ian Wilker

New Voices of Philanthropy


Add comment May 6, 2008

A Look At Science 2.0, including OpenWetWare Case Study

Last week, I published a post on Health 2.0, based on a couple research studies that were recently released.

Also last week, another report was published by the Scientific American Magazine that looked at the concept of Science 2.0, titled “Is Open-Access Science the future?

About

Before this article was published, the author put the draft version of the article in a wiki, and encouraged readers’ comments and edits…to help formulate the articles final version.

In this article, the author looks at the increasing use of social media within marketing, journalism, and politics - and how it can spread to the field of science, as more researchers increase their use of web 2.0 tools within their research. Some critics think that this new process to scientific discovery curbs the traditional institutional lines and poses danger. Advocates see Science 2.0 as a way to increase openness and collaboration across studies - furthering progress

Science 2.0

Science 2.0 refers to the growing movement of integrating social media into the scientific process and its promotion. Science 2.0 is a component of the broader Open Science movement according to the author of the article, M. Mitchell Waldrop. This Open Science Movement includes other topics such as open-access scientific publishing and open-data practices.

Case Study

The article points to a success project named OpenWetWare at MIT, which:

OpenWetWare is an effort to promote the sharing of information, know-how, and wisdom among researchers and groups who are working in biology & biological engineering. OWW provides a place for labs, individuals, and groups to organize their own information and collaborate with others easily and efficiently.”

OpenWetWare now hosts more than 15 labs, 6100 web pages and is edited by 3000 registered users. To learn more, gain access, or get involved, you can contact the project at admin@openwetware.org or join here.

Concerns

Due to the content of this budding use of technology, in that it is labeled ’science’ brings many concerns to critics minds. These include:

  • Privacy Concerns
  • Authorship and Copyright
  • Looking ‘unprofessional’
  • Undermining the field of ’science’
  • Trust-worthiness of information and hackers

Future

Despite concerns, advocates see Science 2.0 as still in its launching point. Future ideas for implementing Science 2.0 include:

  • Collaborate for scientific articles and ideas
  • online lab journals
  • Developing internet-friendly lab equipment
  • Virtual scientific conferences
  • Virtual Labs
  • Updated Lab ‘feeds’
  • Data-Sharing
  • Truth-Based Social Marketing
  • For more information regarding these ideas and more visit here.

More

  • Duncan Hull wrote up an insightful blog post about science 2.0 by interviewing scientist and researcher Dave DeRoure. DeRoure mapped out what he thinks is a widening gap between scientists and the web infrastruture. You can read the post here.
  • For those who like reading how trends relate, the Columbia Journalism Review wrote up a great article about web 2.0 and its evolution to Journalism 2.0 and Science 2.0, and how the two concepts relate. The author demonstrates how concerns towards the two fields are similar and the implications this has for science journalism 2.0.

What are your thoughts on Science 2.0?? A ‘yay’ or a ‘nay’ …share with us your thoughts


2 comments May 5, 2008

Defining Health 2.0

According to a January 2008 study titled How America Searches, Health and Wellness:

  • In the past 12 months, 59% of adults reference the internet to find or access health and wellness information.
  • 67% of adult searchers use general search engines as an online tool or resource for health information and only 7% referred to online drug advertisements.
  • 36% of adult searchers use online health information to see what other consumers say about a medication or treatment

Because of statistics like those above, the concept of ‘Health 2.0′ has increased its usage and importance. Simply, Health 2.0 = the merging of social media into healthcare. However, others see the movement of Health 2.0 as something much wider and farther reaching. Even Google image searching shows a variety of more complex definitions. I’d be interested to see how you all define it for yourselves or for your practice.

Examples of Health 2.0

Websites

  • Carol.com , started in 2006, is the marketplace for care, allowing hospitals and providers to ‘bid’ for consumers’ care
  • Vitals.com, allows patients to review their current doctor’s or a potential doctor’s reviews and ratings
  • DoubleCheckMD, allows consumers to check for potential drug interactions quickly and easily
  • American Well , creates a healthcare marketplace where consumers and physicians come together online to acquire and provide convenient and immediate healthcare services

Wikis

  • Wikipedia
  • FluWiki
  • WiserWiki, a medical and healthcare information wiki edited exclusively by physicians
  • Clinfo Wiki, a wiki devoted to clinical informatics
  • Ask Dr. Wiki, allows those with a medical background to publish review articles, clinical notes, pearls and/or medical images to the wiki. The main focus has been on Cardiology and Electrophysiology, but they have expanded to other areas.

Blogs

  • DiabetesMine, a blog all about diabetes
  • HealthMatters (Healthline), a collection of weblogs by professionals, covering different aspects of health, wellness, treatments, and recent advances
  • WebMD, provides health and health-related information

Social Networks

Video-Sharing

  • ICYou, the source of healthcare videos and videos related to health information
  • Cleveland Clinic on Google Video
  • TauMed, a virtual health community where one can search and share information on a variety of health topics

Online Forums

Podcasts

Caution

Health 2.0 researchers warn that patients should be cautious about posting personal health-related information through unsecured social media as health insurance providers could gain access to this information, as well as potential employers.

Future

Social Media combined with health information, patients and user-generated content can be used for:

  • User-generated health ratings for hospitals and doctors
  • Bridge the gap between doctor and patient
  • Bring communities together in new, innovative ways
  • Establishing patients as opinion leaders
  • Managing health and managing community health in new ways

For specific case studies and more information, view this report titled: The Wisdom of Patients: Health Care Meets Online Social Media prepared for the California Healthcare Foundation by Jane Sarasohn-Kahn.

Questions to Ponder

  • Is Health 2.0 helpful or harmful?
  • Is the content trustrworthy? Does it matter? Will consumers take the information at face value?
  • Why are patients labeled as consumers? What does this mean/say about how health 2.0 is being approached?
  • What are the ethical concerns?
  • What are the privacy concerns?

Can’t wait to read your insights in the comments. =)


5 comments April 30, 2008

Why invest in social marketing?

Joe, on the social marketing list serv, posed a great scenario the other week and has allowed me to share its results in a blog post, as I think many others will find the information helpful.

Joe posed the question that asked for research that shows why providing people with information does not change behavior alone…aka: how do you show the value of investing in social marketing?

The listserv showed its wisdom, value and use by its overwhelming response. The responses full of resources, tips and ideas are summarized below, thanks to Joe’s help.

Individual attribution to comments have been erased to protect the person’s privacy. Also, these comments are made by individuals and do not reflect the attitudes of the entire social marketing list serv or the author of this blog. But, it should provide some great food for thought and perhaps offer some ideas for effective social marketing. In no particular order…

Comments

1. Some people think information alone changes behaviors. Ask them this: Do most people in America know thateating less and being more active will lead to weight loss? Knowing that, we should all be thin, right, because we all know this

I have spent the last eight years using emotion to influence health related behaviors. Check out one project at this website that shows how emotions could be used to change health-related behaviors: www.touchingheartstouchingminds.com

All marketing research says that emotions drive behaviors, not logic and fact alone. There are hundreds of books you could suggest, but here’s a simple one: Marketing Straight to the Heart by Barry Fieg

2. I don’t know of any one definitive study, but the example I often use is smoking. Numerous studies show that ‘everyone’ or at least the vast majority know that smoking is harmful, so giving people the facts just
isn’t enough.

3. I’m sure you could find information to this effect on the WHO site under health promotion. I believe also that Green & Kreuter discuss this with the PRECEDE-PROCEED model.

4. I would recommend you take a look at the ways that Safe Routes to School has opted to address the challenge of getting more kids to be active by walking or biking to school. The most broad and brief description of our issue is that involves changing behaviors to combat childhood obesity and also teach safety. Together with bicycle advocacy in general we’ve found that it’s not just education, but also encouragement, enforcement and engineering. Programs that don’t have a good balance of the 4 e’s don’t seem to be effective. I’d be happy to give you more information if you find it appropriate.

5. To that I would add the same thought around drinking and driving. Not only do people know it’s bad and potentially very harmful, it is even against the law, yet people continue to engage in the behavior.

6. How about these:

Tobacco. For a decade we let people know that tobacco kills one out of three people. It wasn’t until we began increasing taxes (price), decreasing access for minors (place), making people smoke outside (ambiance), and providing quit lines (products) that we saw significant decrease (about 50% decrease since 1964).

Seatbelts. Letting people know that “we love you so buckle up” only got about half of us to do it. It took primary seatbelt laws, increased fines, more comfortable seatbelts, “ding ding ding” sounds as reminders.

Recycling. Look at the low rates of recycling before we began providing containers (products) and streetside pickup (place) and in come communities fines for putting recyclables into garbage cans (price).

Organ Donation: We would not have the numbers of organ donors (although still not what we need) if we didn’t have sign up when getting/renewing our drivers license (Place).

Voting: Oregon has the highest voting rates in the country because they have the (only) vote-by-mail (place).

7. Here are a couple of other sources from the public health field:
http://www.collegedrinkingprevention.gov/NIAAACollegeMaterials/TaskForce/CallToAction_02.aspx#CallToAction_02_d

This one talks about ineffective strategies related to college students and alcohol.

You could also check: http://www.thecommunityguide.org/index.html I believe that they probably have some statements in their reviews about the ineffectiveness of straight education efforts.

8. Ok, here’s the grand daddy: What customers Think by Gerald Zaltman of Harvard School of Business. A painful book to read, but it is loaded with tons of research studies documenting that feelings are more important than facts. Don’t buy the book–it’s not one you’ll love to read. It’s in almost every library. Other (less painful) options: The Marketing Power of Emotion by John and Nicholas O’Shaughnessy by Oxford press. Body of Truth: Leveraging what consumers can’t or won’t say by Dan Hill. Who am I: The 16 Basic desires that motivate our actions and define our personalities by Steven Reiss of Ohio State. I’ve attached an article by him for a quick start.

9. I find it also helps to provide an example of when communication alone does work so they can see the difference in the factors that influence behavior. The example I like is SIDS. When we communicated that all you need to do is put your child to sleep on his back, the behavior change was readily adopted. But how hard is it to do that behavior. It doesn’t require any special equipment or special/skilled knowledge or special kind of person to do the action. Unless there is a cultural taboo against sleeping on one’s back, then this was easy to get people to do with communication alone. Not to mention that the potential outcome was highly prized and the opposite behavior could lead to catastrophic outcomes. So it was east to cut through the clutter, be heard, and be motivated — all pretty much with just communication. Then I show them Nancy Lee’s examples and point out why communication alone didn’t change behavior initially.

10. The challenge in finding research is this is one of those “it depends” issues. In some cases, such as when there is a severe threat and an easy-to-perform action, information IS enough to change the behavior of many — two examples I recall are putting babies on their back to sleep to avoid Sudden Infant Death Syndrome and not giving children aspirin to avoid Reye’s Syndrome.

However, in many other cases, information alone isn’t. Mike Rothschild’s “Carrots, Sticks and Promises” article may either be what you need or point you to it — especially the discussion of the Motive, Opportunity, Ability framework (e.g., for info alone to work, one must have the motivation, opportunity and ability to make the change). You can find it here: http://www.social-marketing.org/papers/carrotarticle.pdf

This is old, but the proceedings from a USDA-sponsored evaluation conference meet the “easy, understandable language” criterion and may help you; a focus of the conference was the situations in which nutrition education “works” and some of the speakers make the points you are probably
trying to find documented: http://www.nal.usda.gov/foodstamp/FOODSTAMPREPORTS/FSP-37.PDF Isobel
Contento’s session should reference a published lit review that draws some of the same conclusions. It’s been a long time since I’ve looked at this document, but some of the discussion was around the many situations in which the Knowledge-attitude-behavior paradigm just doesn’t work, and the need to also address the environment in which the behavior is taking place.

11. The example I use when presenting is to ask people to raise their hands if they know that eating right and getting regular exercise are important for good health (almost all hands go up). Then I ask how many people in the room actually do eat right and get enough exercise (half or so will raise their hands).

12. I think CSAP’s (SAMHSA’s Center for the Application of Prevention Technology) environmental approach to alcohol abuse, misuse and underage drinking prevention may offer support for your argument. There is little doubt that a comprehensive approach to substance abuse prevention is the most effective means to see positive results. CSAP basically suggests besides information dissemination and education, policy change and alternatives are necessary for success. http://www.captus.org/Western/resources/bp/step6/bpcsap.cfm Another organization, PIRE, (Pacific Institute for Research Evaluation) provides more than adequate data to support the necessary inclusion of policy change to reduce DUI’s and underage drinking. You can find that data on their site. http://www.pire.org/index.asp I’ve believed that the three legged stool metaphor is appropriate for alcohol misuse prevention. Information dissemination, alternatives and policy change are the legs that support behavioral change. Many would argue that addressing individual factors included in the universal, school, family and peer environments also need to be addressed and I would have a difficult time arguing with that. The bottom line is comprehensive approaches are best. I hope this helps.

13. You might want to look at the accessible work of Larry Green, who developed the PRECEDE-PROCEED models for (health) behavior change. His web site http://www.lgreen.net/precede.htm notes that there some 960 published studies that apply this model and he includes a link to a bibliography. There is also the body of work by Martin Fishbein at UPenn. His two key contributions to behavior change research: the Theory of Reasoned Action and Expectancy-Value Theory might bolster your (correct) assertion that it takes more than information to change behavior. You need to understand the larger context of how people perceive and value the information, and how attitude plays a major role. Wikipedia has accessible explanations of this scientifically rigorous work. Hope this helps. Web sites of other government agencies, such as the National Cancer Institute, may help. They have huge programs studying how to optimize communication (they don’t refer to it as social marketing, but that’s what it is) in order to produce behavior change. NCI’s Pink Book (aka Making Health Communication Programs Work) is a concrete example of what another gov’t agency is doing in this arena.

14. While in my graduate program in public health we learned that effective programs must include components of Knowledge Attitude and behavior change. Please check out the following resource on tools for Behavior Change Communication: http://www.infoforhealth.org/inforeports/BCCtools/2.shtml Under the section labeled “Understand Audience and other Potential Participants..” Collect in depth information about the audience: What are their knowledge attitudes and beliefs about health? To further support your argument you can also refer to the basic rules of evaluation… Establishing program objectives and deciding the particular evidence (such as the specific knowledge, attitudes, or behavior) that will demonstrate that the objectives have been met. A key to successful evaluation is a set of clear, measurable, and realistic program objectives. If objectives are unrealistically optimistic or are not measurable, the program may not be able to demonstrate that it has been successful even if it has done a good job. http://www.evaluationwiki.org/index.php/Evaluation_Definition I hope this is of help to you.

Still with us?? =)


15.
Check out the US Forest Service’s research station. An excellent contact there is Pat Winter, PhD, a USFS employee who conducts research that may relate to your mission as well. At least, you can show that federal agencies understand the value of social marketing and are active in defining how it can be used to meet their goals.

16. I hope this helps. This article tells of a specific program that helps in drinking and driving in a Texas City. I have not analyzed the methods, but sounds very interesting. Also the Dept of Texas funds a drinking and driving program for young adults. The program is run by an Sherry Matthews Advocacy Agency in Austin, if you need more info let me know. The website is: http://whosdrivingtonight.com/

17. You can try searching this reference-see below for a brief summary (Redman, Spencer and Sanson-Fisher, 1990) though it’s a bit outdated, it might give you a bit of a start. This was taken from page 10 of The Health Communication Unit’s resource booklet on communication campaigns.
http://www.thcu.ca/infoandresources/publications/OHCMasterWorkbookv3.2.mar26.07.pd

When applied on their own-without complementary strategies such as community mobilization-the ability of some health communication campaigns to effect change is limited. In particular, a large body of evidence suggests that health communication campaigns relying exclusively on media appeals are not a sufficient means of changing attitudes and behaviour. In some contrast to the meta analysis found on this page, recent review of 24 published evaluations of health promotion programs revealed that media alone interventions had little impact on behaviour (Redman, Spencer and Sanson-Fisher, 1990).

18. Of course, the answer is (as it always seems to be when you look closely), “it depends.” On the behavior in question, that is. A very good scientific discussion of the if/thens is provided in Leslie Snyder’s meta-analysis. The reference is: Snyder LB. J Nutr Educ Behav. Health communication campaigns and their impact on behavior. 2007 Mar-Apr;39(2 Suppl):S32-40.

19. I think this might help you out a bit…(abstract) This paper proposes that stigma in relation to people with mental illness can be understood as a combination of problems of knowledge (ignorance), attitudes (prejudice) and behaviour (discrimination). From a literature review, a series of candidate interventions are identified which may be effective in reducing stigmatisiation and discrimination at the following levels: individuals with mental illness and their family members; the workplace; and local, national and international. The strongest evidence for effective interventions at present is for (i) direct social contact with people with mental illness at the individual level, and (ii) social marketing at the population level. http://www.ijmhs.com/content/2/1/3

20. This is an issue I deal with all the time and there’s tons of research to the contrary. Most behaviour change theories use some variant of the motivation, opportunity, ability model where knowledge is just one aspect of ability. If there’s no opportunity to behave or motivation to behave knowledge alone won’t work. Here’s one reference: Keller, Kevin Lane. “Memory Retrieval Factors and Advertising Effectiveness.” In Advertising Exposure, Memory and Choice, edited by Andrew A. Mitchell. New Jersey; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., 1993. If you’d like more please let me know. In an ideal world I’d suggest doing a KAPB survey and asking the same questions of those who already do what you want and those who don’t.
Ask a bunch of knowledge questions as well as other motivation, opportunity and ability questions. If the knowledge levels of those who behave and those who don’t behave are the same it’s clearly not the key thing driving behaviour and sadly this data is often necessary to finally convince people not to focus on knowledge.

21. Perhaps the point is not so much providing evidence to this person(there is lots of that), but acknowledging that they do have a point and then showing them evidence that while info alone can bring about change, enhancing the info/facilitating/etc etc can bring about greater change & faster. The fact is that many people do change their behavior on the basis of information alone. The Sloan-Kettering report on cancer & tobacco tar in 1953 and the 1964 Surgeon-General’s report on smoking were both followed by declines in smoking rates without any campaigns or other measures. However smoking rates began (and continued) to decline significantly when advertising campaigns dramatized & personalized the information. (Of course not all behaviours are the same — nor are all people - and that is another point).

Hope this helps! =)


Add comment April 23, 2008

(Ad Council and IAA) Survey Says: More Social Marketing!

At this past week’s International Advertising Association’s World Congress in Washington D.C, the Ad Council and IAA revealed results from the Ad Council IAA Member Survey on Social Advertising Programs. For all social marketers out there, the results are on our side.

Among the Key Findings, the following figures were given in support of social marketing:

  • 57% of respondents felt their country should implement MORE social marketing campaigns than it currently has.
  • 61% said their country NEEDS HELP developing social marketing campaigns.
  • 90% of respondents expressed interest in sharing and learning MORE about research and creative materials for social marketing campaigns in other countries.

As I was in attendance during this conference, you can imagine how STOKED I was about this. I had to pinch myself. Here I was at the IAA World Congress, and did I hear right:  We are talking about social marketing. The real social marketing. Not social media. I could barely contain myself. Then, it happens again, and then again. And then I realize, the IAA is trying to educate and send a message to the ad community: invest in social marketing!

But where were we social marketers? our experts in the field? our voice? Absent. Here was a chance to share our passion, knowledge, excitement and message with the very industry that we can work with….and we weren’t there. So, here is my message for this post. Social marketing is great and wonderful. But we can’t stay in our bubble. We’ve reached out to the non-profit community, but all advertisers aren’t bad. There are big movers and shakers who want to do good and see the value in doing goog. We need to integrate ourselves with them….not be divisive.

********************************************************

These results were shared with the Advertising industry during the IAA presentation for the 1st Social Responsibility advertising awards. These awards were presented with cooperation between IAA and ACT Responsible. The Grand Prix winner was “Signature” for Amnesty International by TBWA/Paris. To see the rest of the recipients, go here.

(This was a web-based survey through Zoomerang among IAA members from December 13, 2007 to February 11, 2008. 204 completed surveys were received from member respondents in six continents. Respondents included respondents from advertisers, ad agencies, media outlets, research companies, trade associations and universities.)


Add comment April 11, 2008

Hookah: An Increasing Issue on the Public Agenda

Today, on SocialBttrfly’s Twitter feed, womenshealth tweeted the following statistic:

Hookah3
“Hookah smoke has as much

or more nicotine and tar as

many filtered cigarettes.”

Hookah has recently been in the news due to health warnings concerning hookah users and their vulnerability to contracting herpes. A March 18, 2008 article from Colorado State University describes an incident where two students are believed to have contracted oral herpes from hookah activities due to the swapping of saliva that occurs.

However, other health effects are possible. Until I received the above tweet, I was unaware on the dangers of hookah. I have personally never done hookah nor really care to, but I know it is an increasing trend on many college campuses. A March 5, 2008 article in The Daily Orange describes this trend more:

“The sociality of hookah is also evidenced on a national level, with hookah bars beginning to open up in major cities as it becomes a trendy activity among teenagers and 20-somethings. “

Apparently, I am not the only one who is less informed about the health consequences of Hookah. According to a study conducted by the Michigan Department of Community Health (MDCH), 79% of hookah smokers believe the flavored tobacco is safer than cigarettes. Type ‘hookah’ in Google news and evidence that  the topic is increasing its prominence on the public agenda appears ten-fold.

So my next thought was:  Are there any social marketing initiatives or PSAs that currently address this issue?

The only PSA I could find was this one on Youtube. The source I have yet to identify.

If you know of more hookah PSAs or social marketing campaigns, please let me know.

For more information on the effects of smoking Hookah, visit CDC’s online factsheet or Womenshealth.gov’s informational description for more information.
____________

Yes, I did say this issue was brought to me in a tweet on Twitter by womenshealth, as in womenshealth.gov. For more information regarding the use of Twitter by non-profits, causes and government agencies, Nedra Weinreich of the social marketing blog, Spare Change, wrote an incredible post on this topic that I know you’ll find helpful.


1 comment March 20, 2008

Greenwashing: What is it, how do we evaluate it, and what does it mean?

This post provides some answers to these questions and some points to ponder.

First, the term greenwashing is taken from the term whitewashing. Whitewashing means to hide, cover or conceal unpleasant facts or details, especially in a political context or to manipulate. According to the Greenwashing Index, Greenwashing is:

“It’s greenwashing when a company or organization spends more time and money claiming to be “green” through advertising and marketing than actually implementing business practices that minimize environmental impact. It’s whitewashing, but with a green brush.”

Knowing this information, enter in the Greenwashing Index, promoted by EnviroMedia Social Marketing and University of Oregon School of Journalism and Communication. The purpose of the Greenwashing Index is “to educate consumers about how to “read” an ad and encourage them to decide for themselves if what they’re seeing is greenwashing.” The index hopes to curb the growth of greenwashing and encourage real environmental responsibility and change.

The index measures and scores advertising claims based on the following five criteria:

  1. The ad misleads with words.
  2. The ad misleads with visuals and/or graphics.
  3. The ad makes a green claim that is vague or seemingly unprovable.
  4. The ad overstates or exaggerates how green the product/company/service actually is.
  5. The ad leaves out or masks important information, making the green claim sound better than it is.

To detect greenwashing, Sourcewatch offers the following tips:

  1. Follow the money trail.
  2. Follow the membership trail.
  3. Follow the paper trail.
  4. Look for skeletons in the company’s closet.
  5. Test for access to information.
  6. Test for international consistency.
  7. Check how they handle their critics.
  8. Test for consistency over time.

As my previous post mentioned, the FTC began a workshop of hearings yesterday a year early about the growing buzz and concerns regarding green marketing. To listen to the FTC hearings about the, click here. The workshops could results in updating the FTC’s green guides, which outlines the FCC’s laws regarding environmental claims for advertiser, marketers and consumers. These guidelines were originally created in 1992. Though the green guides were updated in 1998, they haven’t been changed since.

Now the final piece: What does this mean to us….as social marketers?

Personally, I think evaluation tools are great, despite the lack of them and the lack of priority in evaluation processes. The evaluation step is one too many organization and marketing directors overlook or skip. I see the Greenwashing Index as another great evaluations tool for us, and I offer up the suggestion that perhaps we should have more such evaluation tools to help keep the private sector accountable and responsible. Doing such, I think, would increase our success in our social marketing endeavors.

More on evaluation procedures and steps in the next post. =)


2 comments January 11, 2008

Defining Green, Including the FTC

Nowadays, when someone says Green, what’s the first thing that pops in your mind?

…a color? a movement? a cause? a political party? earth? environmentalists? global warming? a marketing tactic? Al Gore? Recycling?

Being a full supporter of going green, I still want to stand back, observe and ask the question: In today’s world, how do we, you, define the word green?

…Even the FTC is struggling to answer this very question. Today, the FTC held its first green marketing workshop to discuss its green advertising regulations a YEAR early because of the growing buzz…and concern! Check out this article for more information about the meeting.

It’s interesting how the choice of diction creates images or perceptions in our minds. Green, or going green, is becoming a mantra for environmental movements and going green is the new trend of ‘08…or was it the trend of ‘07? Even the AMA (American Marketing Association) has adopted the movement and now acknowledges the concept ‘green marketing.’ GreenBiz, a green conscious information resources that tracks companies eco-friendliness, offers green marketing as one of their hot topics by offering features about the various shades of green that run in-style among us marketers.

However what does being green really mean? In 2006, this same question was asked in an article written by Brandweek titled: Companies Find It’s Not Easy Marketing Green. In the article, the authors state quote:

“Spiraling fuel prices and global warming fears have increasingly put environmental issues on the front page and in advertising efforts. But as more companies adopt these campaigns, consumers are growing increasingly confused over what it means to be “green,” making it harder to create effective environmental marketing efforts, according to a recently released study by Landor Associates, New York.

“Is it about the environment, organic food or ‘good-for-you’ living? … It could be about all of those things,” said Allen Adamson, managing director at Landor. “It is easy to say you are green, but consumers are skeptical. And because everyone wants to jump on the green bandwagon, all of a sudden it is noisy in this space, and it is hard to break through.”

The article continues offering statistics on how consumers are weary of the increasing levels of products, services and companies who claim to be green. Though it is an older article, the trend seems to escalate still today, just do a Google search for ‘green marketing’ and it becomes clear that the term continues to grow discussion, especially since the FTC even took notice.

  • So, how do we as social marketing break through the clutter?
  • What does this trend mean for us?
  • And, what does the word ‘green’ mean to you?

Feel free to share your thoughts. This discussion will be continued in my next post. =)

To get a sneak peak about the next post, read this article about greenwashing


Add comment January 10, 2008

Going Green

Any Oprah fans in the atmosphere? On last Friday’s show, Oprah’s show featured: Going Green 101 where she shared many tips and insights on how individuals and families can join the fight to save our earth. Feeling inspired, I wanted to provide my own list of simple and easy ways to Go Green this upcoming year. Some of my favorites from Oprah’s show are also shared.

Bathroom

1. Turn your water off in between brushing your teeth.

2. Unplug straightener, shaver, blow dryer, etc. when not in use. When items are plugged in, they still use up to 40% power.

3. Buy a shower timer to conserve water.

4. Use tissue and toilet paper sparingly.

Kitchen

1. If you’re making a picnic, choose plastic over paper plates. They can be reused and recycled.

2. Buy energy saving appliances to help global warming. Look for the blue Energy Star label when purchasing or visit www.energystar.gov for more information.

3. Use reusable containers to put away leftover rather than plastics wrap or foil. Also, in the same line of thinking, use rags to clean up messes when possible to conserve paper towels.

Cleaning

1. Instead of adding yard waste or lawn clippings to landfills, use a mulching mower. Not only is it healthier for your yard, but its healthier for all of Earth.

2. Use healthier cleaning products. Good clean doesn’t have a smell and are safer for our bodies too. Good companies to look into include Shaklee and Method.

3. Remember to inflate your tires about every two weeks. This allows your tires to last longer, meaning more rubber is conserved.

House

1. Turn lights on and off when entering and exiting rooms.

2. Caulk your windows to get the most out of your heating and air conditioning. This will save energy and money. Double bonus!

3. Use energy strips. This helps save power and cuts down on your energy bill. When something is off, but still plugged in, it still uses power.

4. Use GE energy smart light bulbs. According to Oprah.com, GE Energy Smart bulbs use 70 to 75 percent less energy than incandescent light bulbs and last up to 10 times longer than most bulbs.

5. Donate books and magazines to public libraries.

6. Use rechargeable batteries instead of throwaway ones.

Food

1. If you haven’t heard about the questions surrounding bottled water, go no further. Bottled water is more expensive…to our pocketbooks, bodies and our world. Save all three. Invest in a Nalgene water bottle or an aluminum water bottle that can be reused, is safer, cost effective, healthier and saves the earth.

2. Buy less packaged food. Read the labels and packaging to see if food is healthy for your body, but also take notice if wasteful materials are being used to sell the item.

Shopping

1. Paper or plastic? Neither! Eco-friendly canvas bags are the new ‘it’ item to have at the supermarket. Check out these places for your very own: eco-chic shopping bags, Delight.com or Skeeda.

2. Donate old clothes and items you no longer use to The Salvation Army or the Goodwill.

3. Do not throw away leather shoes. Leather takes 50 years to decompose. Donate them.

4. Resell or donate your old, used cellphone even! Lots of companies buy back phones, spruce ‘em up and then resell them at lower rates. Green mobile is one such company.

5. Just say no…to receipts. When an ATM or a gas pump asks if you want a receipt, say no. This will save many precious trees.

Activities

1. Visit a landfill. As Oprah’s show told us, throwing something away, doesn’t mean that it goes away. It goes somewhere else.

2. Plant trees. The more CO2 we can create, the better.

3. Adopt a cause and become an activist. Green is the new pink everyone. Just check out Matt Damon’s favorite organization Greendimes, Stop Global Warming!, or Gwenyth Paltrow and Cameron Diaz’ organization ‘act green’ that works to reduce dependence on oil and for energy conservation.

4. Use newspapers as wrapping paper.

5. TreeCycle 2008. Recycle your now old Christmas trees.

6. Take up Shard Art. Also known as Pique Assiette mosaic art. Use pieces of broken glass to create wonderful new pieces of art.

7. Visit and shop at your local farmer’s market.

Entertainment

1. Beg, borrow or buy Al Gore’s documentary: An Inconvenient Truth.

2. Read The Green Book by Elizabeth Rogers and Thomas M. Kostige.

3. Watch the television series Planet Earth.

4. Attend a Drive-In movie, according to Eath911.org.

5. Carpool. This web service helps you connect with others looking to carpool in your area.

6. Catch Leonardo DiCaprio’s film The Eleventh Hour, about the growing dangers of global warming, set to come out soon!

And lastly, one way to recycle I would not recommend….using old condoms as hairbands. True story.

And on that note, hope this was enough to get motivated. Feel free to leave your favorite recycling tips below too!

Eco-Friendly Websites for further information:

Green People
Greenpeace
Idealbite
Global Green USA
TreeHugger


4 comments January 8, 2008

Web 3.0: In Response to an ‘Official’

This is a response-post to a different blog titled, “Web 3.0: An Official Definition.’

“Give me liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely
according to conscience, above all liberties.” -John Milton

This post is not to criticize any points, but to bring up a point for discussion. According to Calacanis.com, the official Web 3.0 definition is as such:

  • Web 3.0 is defined as the creation of high-quality content and services produced by gifted individuals using Web 2.0 technology as an enabling platform.

My concern is with the term ‘gifted individuals.’ Web 2.0 is technology that has given a voice to many individuals, who previously, were left unheard. I think that our forefathers, John Milton and John Stuart Mills would be beaming at the bursting free marketplace of ideas. Indeed, some believe that the web allows us a real chance at really discussing issues and revealing new truths. I wonder what Milton and Mills would think of technology designed to hand that freedom over to select ‘gifted individuals.’ This post is not to argue against the technology. I am all about it. Instead, this post is to ask a question on how that technology will be used, especially when dangerous gray areas lead away from information of many, to the information of the select few.

In the post, the author also states:

Web 3.0 throttles the “wisdom of the crowds” from turning into the “madness of the mobs” we’ve seen all to often, by balancing it with a respect of experts.’ Web 3.0 is a return to what was great about media and technology before Web 2.0: recognizing talent and expertise, the ownership of ones words, and fairness. It’s time to evolve, shall we?”

I think the author makes some great points, and I understand his general idea. However, I am cautious to say that the new Web 3.0 technology is only for experts and gifted individuals….and will be saving us from any mobs. With this technology, who will decide what is talent, and what is expertise? Where will the power be left? For myself, I welcome the new technology, yet at the same time, I like being able to read the spectrum of opinions and decide for myself where the truth lies.

My view on this other blog’s post was also formed when I saw that he censored the comments towards his post. Though I understand his point of wanting constructive dialogue, I’m glad he could outline his expertise on what a free discussion should entail. =)


1 comment December 19, 2007

Previous Posts


Subscribe

Taking Flight

Bookmark and Share

Recent Posts

Top Posts

Kudos

Featured in Alltop

Categories

Popular Topics

RSS Spare Change

Feeds

Links

Archives

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License.
If you have questions, comments or concerns, email me at socialbutterfly4change@gmail.com.