Branding
In a recent advisement session, my thesis advisor Neil Churcher was going on about the recent efforts by BP to brand the concept of a carbon footprint as part of their alternative energy initiative. I’ve personally seen mention of the word “carbon footprint” on the web and in print, with a print ad employing a big foot made out of text which talks about carbon footprints. BP offers on its website information about carbon footprints in addition to a carbon footprint calculator.
Neil’s point is that now no other oil company can come along and talk about carbon footprints. This is interesting and disturbing, as it is almost a hijacking of a language, that language being the language of sustainability. What if a company comes along and brands the concept of green roofs? Would such a move help or hinder the green roof movement?
Naturally, BP does not own the concept of carbon footprints. But what they have effectively done is staked out some territory that no other oil company can now lay claim to (or any other company, for that matter). I see this as part first-mover advantage (all other oil companies will be seen as following in BP’s footsteps when they talk about carbon footprints) and part smart branding strategy (following BP’s evolution from British Petroleum to Beyond Petroleum—now whenever you hear carbon footprint, you think BP, even if it’s outside the context of BP).
What concerns me is the annexation of terminology needed to describe change: what exactly does it mean if the language is no longer associated with the changes we need to make but rather with the corporations enacting those changes? Should we be glad that corporations are enacting changes, period? Or should we worry about their methods, means, and motivations?
I for one am a little worried.
Worldchanging has a brief piece about mainstreaming the carbon footprint.
Grist also talks about the BP carbon footprint phenomenon.
I suppose, in a roundabout way, this is what Honda and Toyota have done with hybrid cars. Now whenever someone thinks of “hybrid,” they think of those two companies, not of American car manufacturers. BP is just taking a very intentional step into this arena and consciously linking the concept with the brand with some very specific marketing. It also helps to have a product, and while Honda and Toyota have an edge here (the cars exist and work and are visible to everyone who drives down the freeway, whereas BP can’t really show what it produces), of the existing oil companies out there, it would seem BP is one of the leading candidates to enact such a change in thinking and perception.