Washing in marketing Flashcards
What is washing in marketing
Definition:
Washing refers to superficial or symbolic gestures made by brands to appear socially or ethically conscious without making substantive changes to address structural inequalities.
Key types of washing:
1. Rainbow washing: using LGBTQ+ symbols (e.g., rainbow flags) without meaningful support for the community
2. Woke washing: Claiming to support social justice movements but failing to take real action
3. Femme washing: Marketing products or campaigns as feminist while ignoring systemic gender inequalities
4. Greenwashing: The practice of falsely portraying a brand, product or organisation as environmentally friendly or sustainable to attract environmentally conscious consumers while making minimal or no substantive efforts to reduce environmental harm.
Reference: Jones (2019) washing often prioritises corporate image and profitability over genuine societal impact
Key takeaway: Washing practices exploit social causes for profit while avoiding genuine action toward structural change
Key characteristics of washing
Definition: Washing is characterized by a focus on appearance rather than substantive action.
Key Features:
- Symbolic Gestures: Superficial use of imagery or slogans.
- No Structural Change: Lack of evidence of action to address root causes of inequalities.
- Profit-Driven: Designed to enhance brand image and boost sales.
Examples:
- Brands using pride flags during Pride Month but donating to anti-LGBTQ+ politicians or organizations.
Reference: Jones (2019): “There is no evidence that advertising campaigns have significantly changed the world for the better.”
Key Takeaway: Washing undermines trust in brands and diverts attention from genuine activism.
Rainbow washing
Definition: The superficial adoption of LGBTQ+ symbols or messaging by brands without meaningful support for the LGBTQ+ community.
Examples:
- Corporations selling rainbow-themed products during Pride Month while failing to implement inclusive workplace policies.
- Brands participating in Pride campaigns but funding anti-LGBTQ+ legislation.
Impact:
- Undermines the authenticity of LGBTQ+ activism.
- Exploits marginalized communities for profit.
Key Takeaway: True allyship requires systemic support, not just symbolic gestures.
Woke washing
Definition: A marketing strategy where brands claim to support social justice issues without taking substantive actions to back their statements.
Examples:
- A company launching a Black Lives Matter-themed campaign while maintaining racially discriminatory hiring practices.
- Brands using social justice slogans but failing to diversify their leadership or supply chains.
Impact:
- Risks trivializing serious issues.
- Creates skepticism about genuine corporate commitment to social causes.
Key Insight: Woke washing can damage a brand’s credibility and alienate socially conscious consumers.
Femme washing
Definition: The use of feminist messaging to market products without addressing systemic gender inequalities.
Examples:
- Beauty brands promoting “self-love” while using unrealistic beauty standards in advertisements.
- Campaigns emphasizing women’s empowerment but failing to improve workplace equality for women employees.
Reference: Farris and Rotenburg (2017): Many empowerment campaigns superficially engage with feminism, avoiding the deeper causes of gender injustice.
Key Takeaway: Genuine feminism in marketing requires addressing structural barriers and promoting long-term equality.
Criticism of washing practices
Key Issues:
- Superficiality: Focuses on aesthetics over action.
- Profit-Driven: Exploits social movements to increase sales without contributing to the cause.
- Lack of Accountability: No concrete steps to measure or prove commitment to the causes they claim to support.
Reference: Jones (2019): Washing raises the question of “Who benefits from these messages?” Brands often benefit financially while the communities they claim to support see no tangible improvements.
Key Takeaway: Washing dilutes the impact of social justice campaigns and reduces trust in corporate activism.
Impact of washing on society
Negative effects:
1. Distrust in brands: Consumers lose faith in corporate sincerity
2. Undermines activism: Diverts resources and attention from genuine efforts to address inequalities
3. Reinforces inequalities: Fails to challenge systemic issues, maintaining the status quo
Key Insight: Washing practices can weaken the credibility of social justice movements by turning activism into a marketing gimmick.
So what can be done?
Recommendations for Avoiding Washing:
- Substantive Action: Ensure campaigns align with tangible corporate policies and actions.
- Transparency: Clearly communicate the steps taken to support the cause.
- Collaboration: Partner with organizations genuinely working on the issue to drive real change.
- Accountability: Measure and report progress regularly to demonstrate commitment.
Example (Authentic brand):
- Tony’s chocolonely: Committed to eradicating child labour in the cocoa industry with measurable impacts.
Key Takeaway: To avoid washing, brands must prioritize integrity and take meaningful, measurable steps toward addressing systemic issues.
Why do companies engage in washing?
Motivations:
1. Enhancing Brand Image: Aligning with social causes improves brand equity.
2. Appealing to Conscious Consumers: Tapping into the growing demand for purpose-driven brands.
3. Profit Maximization: Exploiting social justice movements as a marketing tool.
Reference: Vredenburg et al. (2020): Consumers increasingly scrutinize brand activism, demanding authenticity.
Greenwashing
Greenwashing refers to the practice of falsely portraying a brand, product, or organization as environmentally friendly or sustainable to attract environmentally conscious consumers while making minimal or no substantive efforts to reduce environmental harm.
Key Characteristics:
1. Misleading Claims: Overstating the environmental benefits of a product or service.
2. Selective Disclosure: Highlighting sustainable features while ignoring the overall environmental impact.
3. Symbolic Actions: Using eco-friendly imagery, buzzwords like “green,” or vague terms like “natural” and “eco-friendly” without evidence.
Examples of Greenwashing:
- Volkswagen Emissions Scandal (2015): Marketed “clean diesel” cars while using software to cheat emissions tests.
- Fast Fashion Brands: Launching “sustainable” collections while continuing unsustainable mass production.
Impact:
- Consumer Trust: Erodes trust in brands and genuine environmental initiatives.
- Activism: Diverts attention from meaningful sustainability efforts.
- Environment: Delays urgent action on climate and environmental challenges.
Reference:
- Delmas & Burbano (2011): Greenwashing confuses consumers, reducing their ability to differentiate between genuinely sustainable companies and those making false claims.
Consumers are willing to pay more for more sustainable products. Greenwashing leads to increased prices without a environmentally friendly production.
Key Takeaway:
Greenwashing undermines environmental progress by prioritizing corporate profit over genuine sustainability. Consumers and regulators must demand transparency and accountability to combat this practice.
Woke washing real-life example
What Happened?
- Pepsi released an ad featuring Kendall Jenner joining a protest and handing a Pepsi to a police officer, which diffuses the tension and leads to celebration among the protestors and officers.
- The ad was meant to convey a message of unity and peace but drew immediate backlash for trivializing serious social justice movements, particularly the Black Lives Matter (BLM) protests.
Why It Was Criticized as Woke Washing:
1. Exploitation of Social Movements:
- The ad used imagery reminiscent of real protests, such as those against police brutality, but failed to address the gravity of these issues.
- Critics argued that the ad commodified the fight for justice to sell soda.
2. Lack of Authenticity:
- Pepsi had no substantial history of supporting social justice causes, making their message seem opportunistic.
- The choice of Kendall Jenner, a privileged celebrity, as the face of the ad felt disconnected from the experiences of those genuinely fighting for social justice.
3. Simplistic Solution:
- The ad implied that societal tensions could be resolved with something as trivial as offering a soda, undermining the complexity and seriousness of the issues.
Impact:
- The backlash was severe, with activists and social media users accusing Pepsi of trivializing important struggles.
- Pepsi quickly pulled the ad and issued an apology, admitting they “missed the mark.”
Key Takeaway:
- The Pepsi incident highlights how woke washing can harm a brand’s reputation if their social justice messaging is seen as insincere or exploitative. Brands must ensure their activism is authentic, well-informed, and supported by tangible actions to avoid similar pitfalls.
