The promoting marketing campaign featured on tv, YouTube, and by way of video-on-demand (VOD) platforms in Could 2021, as a part of the corporate’s model relaunch.
In animation format, Harmless Drinks depicted a brown-hued, polluted surroundings being ‘messed’ up by humankind. The characters within the advert resolve to ‘repair up’ the surroundings, and in doing so, the animation’s palette turns into greener and extra vibrant.
Depictions of timber being planted are accompanied by pictures of fruit being squeezed into an Harmless Drinks bottle.
The marketing campaign obtained 26 complaints in whole, certainly one of which got here from Extinction Revolt sister group Plastics Revolt. The advocacy group challenged whether or not the advert exaggerated the entire environmental advantage of the merchandise.
‘Probably the most offensive type of greenwashing’
When the advert got here out final yr, Plastics Revolt was vocal about its judgement: “The crudity of the greenwashing is a brand new low,” it famous.
“Develop fruit in a monoculture, you’re going to deplete soil, you’re going to suck the tropics dry in your bananas and your mangos, you’re going to bottle in it plastic, and that’s going to repair up the planet?”
Plastics revolt penned a letter to Harmless Drinks on the time, stating it was ‘incensed’ by the model relaunch advert.
“Its said purpose, to encourage individuals to take their very own small steps to assist the planet and present how collective motion can result in constructive change, represents the worst and most offensive type of greenwashing.
“Shopping for fruity, sugary drinks in plastic bottles just isn’t going to repair up the planet.”
Deceptive promoting
In response to the CAP and BCAP Codes, the idea of environmental claims have to be clear.
Nevertheless, this was not the case in Harmless’s adverts, in line with the ASA, which thought of a ‘robust’ affiliation was drawn between their merchandise and a constructive impression on the surroundings.
The promoting watchdog judged that ‘many’ shoppers would interpret the general presentation of the advert to imply that buying Harmless merchandise was a alternative which might have a constructive environmental impression.
The ASA continued: “Though we acknowledged that Harmless had been enterprise varied actions which had been geared toward decreasing the environmental impacts of their merchandise, that didn’t show that their merchandise had a internet constructive environmental impression over their full lifecycles.
“We additionally famous that their drink bottles included non-recycled plastic and that the extraction of uncooked supplies and subsequent processing of these supplies with the intention to produce the bottle would have a destructive impression on the surroundings.”
ASA, which dominated the advertisements ‘deceptive’, requested Harmless to take away the advert. Harmless did so ‘promptly’, we had been instructed. The corporate didn’t obtain a superb.
Harmless Drinks responds
Harmless Drinks responded to the ASA that there was no suggestion within the advert, via statements or imagery, that buying Harmless merchandise themselves would result in a constructive surroundings impression.
The model is engaged environmentally as a signatory to the Enterprise Ambition for 1.5°C, and by utilizing recyclable plastic in its drink bottles.
“We’re upset to see the ruling from the ASA. Our advert was at all times supposed to focus on essential international environmental points and the necessity for collective motion to make a change,” Harmless famous in an announcement. “We transparently share extra concerning the work that we do on sustainability on our web site.”
The model stated it stays dedicated to its new platform ‘Little Drinks Massive Desires’, because it ‘resonates effectively’ with shoppers and permits the enterprise to speak on massive environmental and well being points. “Nevertheless, we won’t be re-running this explicit advert.”