In the ever-evolving arena of corporate communications, a new phenomenon is emerging. Greenbleaching – misuse of green communication to paint an organization more favorably during crises that have nothing or little in common with environmental, social, and governance (ESG) issues demands immediate attention. Businesses, communication professionals, and sustainability practitioners must meet the growing demand to act ethically and responsibly when communicating.
Like in the high jump: with every success, the bar is getting higher. Nowadays, organizations around the world grapple with increasing expectations for ESG responsibility. In crises, some organizations tend to say: “We may be responsible for this, but we are acting green”.
The rapid ascent of this trend, especially across the US and Europe, but breaking grounds in Asia as well, requires strong ethical vigilance and highlight. Thus, let`s see greenbleaching, the unethical sibling of extremely unethical greenwashing, from various angles and perspectives.
It has been analyzed in detail in my research on the topic “From greenwashing to greenbleaching: green communication and mitigating moral outrage in the context of revisited situational crisis communication theory”, which has been published in globally renowned Emerald`s SCOPUS- and ABDC(B)-listed Corporate Communication: An International Journal.
An Unfortunate Twist in the Green Communication Tale
To understand greenbleaching, one must first understand the intention behind it. While greenwashing involves overstating or faking sustainable initiatives, greenbleaching adds an additional layer of complexity. Greenbleaching is not necessarily associated with falsifying data and practices: it is an unethical use to depict the organization positively during crises and possibly twist the crisis pathway and perception of crisis responsibility.
Unlike mere greenwashing, greenbleaching is intricately tied to crisis management strategies, especially in crisis situations that can cause significant value incongruence between an organization and its stakeholders. Companies opt for greenbleaching to divert attention from other ethical shortcomings by exaggerating or even fabricating past environmental achievements. During times of moral outrage or crises unrelated to ESG, greenbleaching is an unethical mechanism to mitigate reputational risks. By emphasizing or sometimes exaggerating previous positive environmental actions, the organizations attempt to shield themselves from the scrutiny of the public.
Simply said, they use green communication as a bleach for their reputation – hence the term “greenbleaching”. Obviously, at its core, greenbleaching thrives on the decoupling of narrative and reality. It presents organizations as ESG boulders irrespective of their real-time operational integrity. This causes an ethical discord and potentially blurs genuine sustainability practices, threatening to undermine trust in real green practices and communication: simply, sooner or later, it turns out to be misleading for stakeholders.
Avoiding the Pitfalls
Differently from greenwashing — which is primarily focused on augmenting commercial benefit — greenbleaching targets crisis mitigation. However, exaggeration or fabrication creates similar ethical pitfalls. A crucial question, then, is: how can businesses avoid swaying into green bleaching while still effectively communicating their environmental commitments?
Arguably, the rise of green bleaching signals the increasing complexity within the sphere of sustainable communication. The revolt against unethical practices is pronounced, challenging corporations to establish genuine, impactful sustainability narratives without falling into greenbleaching tactics. This trend is especially visible among the younger digitally literate population, making the challenge even more multifaceted.
More stringent oversight and ethical compliance in green communication could help. The worldwide awareness about ESG necessitates that we intensify efforts to monitor and regulate corporate communication strategies and avoid misuses of any kinds. However, is it even possible in the emerging multipolar profit-driven world?
Collaboration stands as a pillar of real ethical transformation. Companies, academics, and practitioners must synergize to establish guidelines that encourage honest and transparent communication. Such partnerships, capable of pointing out both greenwashing and greenbleaching, can pave the way for strategies that minimize reputational risk while building lasting trust in their sustainability commitments. Public pressure, both in physical and digital space, remains an instrumental tool in compelling companies to adhere to genuine, trustworthy communication.
Navigating Uncharted Waters
The emergence of green bleaching signals both a challenge and an opportunity. It is a challenge due to the ethical dilemmas, and an opportunity to enhance genuine dialogue and standards. It also indirectly amplifies the need for businesses to transcend mere obligation, moving towards thorough integration of honest practices into their core operations.
Growing ESG awareness can be harnessed to establish robust frameworks and communication strategies that will effectively bridge the gap between narrative and action. Internal organizational alignment with ESG goals must propel the narrative, fostering a climate where green bleaching becomes unnecessary and unethical communication practices are promptly eliminated from consideration by the organization itself.
As the pursuit of sustainable business practices intensifies globally, understanding and addressing green bleaching is crucial. In a world that insists on transparency, authenticity, and accountability, addressing green bleaching will undoubtedly contribute to the broader aspiration of sustainable development. Let’s keep our fingers crossed.
Dr Marko Selakovic, Assistant Professor – Marketing & Communications at SP Jain School of Global Management
