{"id":13131,"date":"2022-02-14T17:35:07","date_gmt":"2022-02-14T17:35:07","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mailinvest.blog\/index.php\/2022\/02\/14\/wizemail-blog-misleading-environmental-advertising\/"},"modified":"2022-02-14T17:35:07","modified_gmt":"2022-02-14T17:35:07","slug":"wizemail-blog-misleading-environmental-advertising","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mailinvest.blog\/index.php\/2022\/02\/14\/wizemail-blog-misleading-environmental-advertising\/","title":{"rendered":"WizEmail Blog :: Misleading Environmental Advertising"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/a>\n<\/p>\n

\n

\n
I don\u2019t want to appear negative in the face of positive management, but it used to irritate me when told to treat a near disaster as an opportunity to be exploited. It was always a lot more complex than that. That doesn\u2019t stop the Advertising Standards Authority\u2019s (ASA) campaign to tackle misleading environmental claims being heralded as bad news for email marketing. Much as I hate to use the phrase, it\u2019s more an opportunity we can exploit.<\/p>\n

\nThe campaign started in September last year and, given the many problems email marketing was subject to around that time, it was probably easy to miss. It seemed to say little at first. The ASA, together with the Committee of Advertising Practice (CAP) and the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) would jointly shine a \u2018brighter regulatory spotlight\u2019 on environmental advertising. In other words, perhaps, do their job.<\/p>\n

\n\"MisleadingThe CMA were first into the breach, publishing their six principles:<\/p>\n

\n1\/<\/strong><\/span> claims must be truthful and accurate,
2\/<\/strong><\/span> claims must be clear and unambiguous,
3\/<\/strong><\/span> claims must not omit or hide important relevant information,
4\/<\/strong><\/span> comparisons must be fair and meaningful,
5\/<\/strong><\/span> claims must consider the full life-cycle of the product or service,
6\/<\/strong><\/span> claims must be substantiated.<\/p>\n

\nAt a time of higher prices, wage stagnation, and supply difficulties the last thing email marketing needs is more restrictions. But if you look carefully at these principles, you will find that they are, more or less, what we are required to do now. This is a positive.<\/p>\n

\nThe publication of these principles, plus the promise the ASA will be focusing on carbon reduction and claims about waste, including terms such as \u2018recyclable\u2019, \u2018biodegradable\u2019, and \u2018plastic alternative\u2019, might cause a number of companies might feel it is a little too risky to run with positive environmental claims. This is good news.<\/p>\n

\nThe final principle, that claims \u2018must be\u2019 substantiated, rather than \u2018can be\u2019 substantiated, could be seen as ambiguous. Every other principal is fairly clear on definition and, just as importantly, intent. Complying with each will be a doddle, if you\u2019re prepared to put in a little work.<\/p>\n

\nThe principles can be summarised quite simply: be open and honest in your claims, don\u2019t obscure anything and, just as importantly, don\u2019t hide behind interpretations. This is good email marketing dogma. If you try to mislead your subscribers, you could well get away with it for a while, but sooner or later they will bite you. If they put it on social media, they could destroy you.<\/p>\n

\nYou don\u2019t need me to tell you that environmental concerns are of importance to many people, and with B2B, companies you are selling to might well not want to be exposed as dealing with those who pollute. To mix metaphors, greenwashing is not an accusation you wish to be tarred with.<\/p>\n

\nThe claim that your company is concerned with its effect on the environment will aid most email marketing campaigns. But it must be based in fact, not only to protect you from resentment of your subscribers, but from the scrutiny of the ASA.
\u00a0<\/p>\n<\/div>\n