Speaking at a conference on greenwashing, the campaign director at Corporate Ethics International, Kenny Bruno, criticized the Sierra Club for its deal with the chemical company, Clorox. "How do we trust Sierra Club if they're getting money?" he asked. Leonard L. Gordon, director of the Northwest regional office of the Federal Trade Commission, told the conference that, while they occasionally intervene if advertisements make clearly false environmental claims, they don't challenge those that are less flagrant. Christine MacDonald, a former employee of Conservation International wrote in her 2008 book "Green Inc.: An Environmental Insider Reveals How a Good Cause Has Gone Bad" that "partnerships" with environmental groups give companies "easy ways to appear green without making significant changes." As a result, these partnerships are "slowing down the corporate awakening to environmental and social responsibilities."

The major military contractor ITT Corporation has hired the PR firm Edelman, to promote the company "in the defense and commercial markets, as well as raise awareness of its ongoing CSR," or corporate social responsibility, efforts. The company especially wants to highlight ITT Watermark, a "corporate philanthropy program that works to provide safe water around the world." The PR firm Cone -- which offers services in "brand marketing, corporate responsibility, crisis management and prevention" -- helped develop the ITT Watermark program. Edelman's Russell Dubner said his firm will promote ITT with "a mixture of influencer engagement, thought leadership, and good-old fashioned media outreach." ITT is the "world's largest supplier of pumps and systems to transport, treat and control water and other fluids," according to its website. In 2007, 39% of ITT's revenues came from its fluid technology business, and 46% from its military electronics and services business.

Procter & Gamble (P&G) "is expanding its My Black is Beautiful (MBIB) marketing program through collaboration on a new TV series set to debut on BET this March," reports PR Week. P&G "multicultural brand manager" Kisha Mitchell Williams described the TV show as "Style magazine meets The View." The first episode will focus on Michelle Obama, "as a recent P&G-conducted survey found that 90% of black women believe her role as First Lady will have a positive impact on the perceptions of black beauty." P&G will promote the show online, with help from the multicultural marketing firm Footsteps Group. A MBIB-themed website will allow visitors to "share videos, photos, and stories, and webisodes." P&G is also promoting the show via Ebony, Essence and other black publications. P&G previously organized "events and cross-country tours" as part of MBIB marketing, which also includes a "manifesto" for the MBIB "movement."

"Fiat, strapped for cash and struggling to draw attention to the Lancia, decided a few years ago to promote the brand as helping improve society," reports Aaron Patrick. So the company sponsored the Ninth World Summit of Nobel Peace Laureates, held in Paris in December 2008. The laureates were driven to the summit in black Lancia Deltas, and filmed by the car company as they arrived. Fiat's now turned that video footage into a car commercial that's getting free air time across Europe, because it's being treated as a public service announcement. After showing several Nobel laureates exiting Lancia Delta cars, the commercial shows an empty car. A photo of imprisoned Burmese pro-democracy activist and Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi then appears, with the words: "Lancia supports Aung San Suu Kyi. Free now." Fiat had the permission of the Nobel laureates, with the exception of Suu Kyi, who could not be contacted. However, "her representatives overseas" had a "positive response" to the commercial. A Fiat executive says the spot is "not only for Lancia's benefit. It's for the benefit of the world." Professor Michael Boylan called the spot "unethical and classless," because "Fiat isn't offering direct help to Ms. Suu Kyi."

The economic downturn is hitting the pet industry, too. To compete in a crowded and shrinking market, Mars' dog food brand Pedigree will buy its first-ever Super Bowl ads. But, rather than directly advertising their dog food, Pedigree will promote dog adoptions. Pedigree executives are convinced that "the cause-marketing approach is the way to go." Branding executive Eli Portnoy agreed: "You can't trust your investment banker, you can't trust the government. But you can trust your dog." Pedigree marketing executive John Anton said, "More dogs are going to end up in shelters because of home foreclosures. ... Every time we run this campaign, we see increased sales." The cause-related angle has the added benefit of not reminding football enthusiasts of last year's pet food recalls. Pedigree, in particular, "voluntarily recalled dry dog food" as recently as this summer, "due to possible contamination with salmonella." The Pedigree ad will be designed by Omnicom ad firm TBWA/Chiat/Day.

Consumer Reports WebWatch's Beau Brendler is questioning SaveTheFrog.com, a new Web site by the Discovery Channel's Animal Planet and the Clorox bleach company. The site purports to educate people about environmental concerns related to the planetwide disappearance of frogs. As Brendler points out, however, "What the Web site doesn't detail is the Clorox company's environmental record over the last couple of decades. It has been less than stellar." Brendler also points out that the domain for SaveTheFrog.com is registered to Fleishman-Hillard, one of the world's largest PR firms. "We know Clorox is trying to position itself as a 'health and wellness' brand, and that their new green image campaign prompted the Sierra Club's Florida chapter to complain about a deal the parent organization did with Clorox," he writes. "Corporations do this kind of thing. But what's a little troubling is the way Animal Planet, part of an organization that's a well-known and respected producer and broadcaster of documentary films on, among other subjects, the environment, has treated the Clorox frog site. Animal Planet's site can't seem to make up its mind whether SaveTheFrogs.com is an advertisement or editorial content."

On December 2 and 3 in San Francisco, "international business representatives will discuss their use of water." The $1900 conference -- titled "Corporate Water Footprinting" -- gives major corporations an opportunity to "announce their new efforts to promote 'water neutrality,' the claim that they can return to local aquifers every drop of water taken for business." Speakers at the conference include executives from Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, MillerCoors and GE. Coca-Cola has already announced plans to become "the most efficient company in the world in terms of water use in the beverage industry," and eventually "water neutral." Yet some scientists question the very concept of water "neutrality." Jeff Conant of Food and Water Watch argues that the phrase is hypocritical marketing. "Multinational corporations like Coke and Nestle would like us to think that they are doing their best to protect our water," he writes, but "these corporations produce non-essential sugary products with the single-minded goal of generating profit. ... Currently, 12 percent of the world's population uses 85 percent of its water," and "lack of clean drinking water leads to nearly 250 million cases of water-related disease each year and between 5 and 10 million deaths." In related news, Canadian environmental groups have filed a complaint against Nestle, saying the company's ads calling bottled water "the most environmentally responsible consumer product," among other "eco-friendly" claims, are misleading.

The Edelman PR firm recently conducted a survey to find out what keeps consumers loyal to a name brand in challenging economic times. They found that "the trick is to forge a 'double-value' for a product by developing a tie-in to a social cause." Cause-related marketing can be a powerful marketing technique. The environment, health, poverty and education were the top causes likely to inspire consumer loyalty. Companies offering what seems to be an added benefit to purchases are appealing to the emotions of the consumer. According to the survey, "only a quarter of consumers gain contentment while shopping. More than four-in-ten (42 percent) say helping others brings a sense of contentment." Unfortunately, it is often impossible for consumers to judge the actual impact that cause-related marketing creates since the amount donated or where it specifically goes is rarely disclosed.

As the Center for Media and Democracy reported previously, the Sierra Club / Clorox deal -- where Clorox uses the Big Green environmental group's name and logo to sell its "Green Works" line of cleaning products, in exchange for Clorox paying Sierra Club "an (undisclosed) percentage of sales" -- is quite controversial. But it's brought in the green for Clorox. Advertising Age reports that "Green Works sales are estimated at $20 million, the product has gotten exposure on 'The Oprah Winfrey Show' and 'The Ellen DeGeneres Show,' and Clorox has raised its volume forecast five times." Meanwhile, the Sierra Club has been slammed by members and non-members alike. Green Works "brand manager" Mark Kohler dismisses the criticism as "misinformation." Kohler says the negative press has been "frustrating" for Clorox, and AdAge advises marketers to "carefully review both sides of a relationship" before launching a corporate / non-profit partnership. But Clorox appears to be profiting handsomely, while four Sierra Club chapters actively opposed the deal, which -- according to some accounts -- was a factor in the Sierra Club's suspension of its Florida chapter.