greenwashing

Random entry RSS

  • Posted in:

    Irish Times accused of greenwashing over sponsored article

    By Conor O’Carroll The Irish Times has been accused of “greenwashing” by an environmental group, in a complaint to the Press Ombudsman. Friends of the Irish Environment (FIE), has accused the Irish Times of failing to meet its responsibility to maintain truth and accuracy under Principle 1 of the Code of Practice for Irish Newspapers and Periodicals. its complaint relates to an image used in an article to promote Silver Hill Duck, saying it “constitutes an act of greenwashing as it inaccurately portrays the reality of Silver Hill Duck’s operations”. The article in question was produced by the Irish Times‘ Content Studio, a commercial-editorial unit at the paper which provides sponsored content for its readers. “The greenwashing is part of the organisation’s portrayal of itself as environmentally friendly” during the planning process, the complaint continues It showcases a number of Irish companies and their international operations contributing to “Ireland’s export success story” and prominently features an image of several ducks standing on some grass while, Micheál Briody, CEO of Silver Hill Farm, poses behind them. In the complaint to the Press Ombudsman, FIE says the “photograph’s backdrop, depicting a tranquil rural scene with ducks freely roaming on grass, does not align with the true conditions within the Silver Hill Duck facility today”. FIE alleges that the ducks used by Silver Hill Duck are “intensively farmed ducks and never have the opportunity to experience natural conditions, including sunlight or grass”, and that “neither at Silver Hill Duck nor at their suppliers are the ducks raised in free-range conditions”. An online brochure on Silver Hill Duck’s website states that ducks are “free roaming and fed a natural diet”, while the website also says: “All aspects of our duck production are owned and controlled by Silver Hill Duck, from breeding, egg production, hatching and selection, to processing, cooking and packaging”. After the company was purchased by a Northern Irish co-operative, Fane Valley, in 2019, duck rearing on-site was reduced and eventually stopped altogether. Now, ducks are reared externally by contractors and brought to the site for slaughter. The complaint relates to an image used in an article to promote Silver Hill Duck, saying it “constitutes an act of greenwashing as it inaccurately portrays the reality of Silver Hill Duck’s operations” Village has contacted Silver Hill Duck for comment. The Irish Times article also refers to a planning application submitted by Silver Hill Duck seeking to expand its facility and increase its production from 80,000 to 120,000 ducks a week. Permission was granted by Monaghan County Council in March this year, but the decision has been appealed to An Bord Pleanála. FIE’s complaint alleges this “misrepresentation in Ireland’s newspaper of record, which inaccurately portrays Silver Hill Duck as practising free-range rearing, will directly impact on the public’s perception of this contentious planning application”. “The greenwashing is part of the organisation’s portrayal of itself as environmentally friendly” during the planning process, the complaint continues. The Irish Times has previously removed sponsored content featuring Land Rover and four brand ambassadors, including RTÉ’s Kathryn Thomas, following complaints to the Advertising Standards Authority for Ireland (ASAI). In considering a complaint related to the Land Rover campaign, the ASAI said that no evidence had been produced to show how driving a Land Rover would lead to a more sustainable lifestyle. The Irish Times has been contacted for comment.

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    Hedgemony

    ‘Twas the night before Christmas, and the Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht was beavering away looking for ways to ensure that no creature was stirring. Especially not a mouse. On 23rd December last year, in the political dead of night, the Minister charged with protecting natural heritage announced a plan to make destroying it even easier for farmers. Heather Humphreys – who lives on a farm, is married to a farmer, and whose brother is the Ulster/North Leinster Regional Chairman of the Irish Farmers Association – took the regressive decision to weaken Section 40 of the Wildlife Act, which deals with the cutting of hedgerows and burning of uplands, on the basis that doing so “will help to address some of the challenges faced by those living in rural areas”. She didn’t address rural people whose challenges are that they actually like hedges and uplands. An already flimsy piece of environmental legislation and notoriously difficult to enforce, Section 40 of the Wildlife Act, 1976 and the subsequent Wildlife (Amendment) Act, 2000 ban cutting and burning between March 1st and August 31st on the well-evidenced grounds that this is the time of year when the birds – including endangered species such as curlew, yellowhammer, linnet and greenfinch – have their birdy babies. The legislation does make provisions to accommodate summer cutting for health and safety reasons (ie on dangerous stretches of road) and in “the ordinary course” of agriculture or forestry. Humphreys, however, contends that this is not, farmers are finding, enough. “I want to strike a balance here”, she said, in a press release that neglected to mention the enormous imbalance that already exists in favour of agriculture over nature. “While hedge-rows and upland areas are very important in terms of wildlife habitat, they also need to be managed in the interests of both farming and biodiversity”. That biodiversity is a prerequisite for farming seems to elude the Minister. Nevertheless, for what it’s worth, last month, for example, an international team of researchers (including Trinity College Dublin’s Yvonne Buckley) proved for the first time that biodiversity “strongly and consistently” enhances productivity. In addition, hedgerows and uplands are known to improve rainwater attenuation and filtration, mitigate flooding, harbour the species that control pests and provide important foraging for crop pollinators such as bees (a third of which are threatened in Ireland). They sequester carbon, support soil fertility, provide resilience to soil erosion and assimilate the nutrients in agricultural run-off. All that tedious old natural- balance stuff. The benefits are provided by the natural world to farmers for free, despite the fact that the environmental cost of farming remains unpaid (according to a 2015 FAO report, the unassailable Irish beef industry alone has racked up debts of at least $15bn in environmental destruction). What might not be lost on her, however, are the 15,000 citizen signatures which oppose the measures. A petition launched by Birdwatch Ireland, An Taisce, the Irish Wildlife Trust and the Hedgelaying Association of Ireland has shown that healthy uplands and hedgerows and the biodiversity they support are beloved by more people than might have been expected, and that a freshly-slaughtered one at the height of summer is something a lot of people, though perhaps no-one the Minister ever meets, don’t want to see. Nonetheless, the proposed changes will be included in the Heritage Bill 2015 on a “pilot” basis, for two years. According to the DAHG website: “Managed hedge cutting will be allowed, under strict criteria, during August to help ensure issues such as overgrown hedges affecting roads can be tackled. Power will also be given to the Minister to allow for controlled burning in certain areas around the country, to be specified by the Minister, during March, should it be necessary, for example, due to adverse weather conditions”. No detail has yet been provided on the “strict criteria” and no provisions for the effective monitoring or enforcement of these measures have been mentioned. To Humphreys and her ag-mates, hedgerows are the annoying prickly bits of brown and green between the luscious elds of monoculture through which Oscar nominees frolic in hazy late-summer sun. Like the overgrown fringes of small children, these superfluous strips of deficit require meticulous and regular trimming in order to avoid negative comment on their unkemptness. The atavistic and visceral commitment to ‘tidiness’ and post-Victorian standards of natural beauty is the exact opposite of what is needed for an environment that is robust enough to support an ever-intensifying agricultural system and resilient enough to absorb the environmental impact it produces. The ‘dog- whistle’ call from IFA Environment Chairman, Harold Kingston, for “a workable outcome” has as so often been met with a grovelling response that works for farmers only, in the short-term, if at all. Michael Smith

    Loading

    Read more