“Every one is saying ‘climate change’ now instead of ‘global warming.’” That statement was uttered to me by a Discovery Channel producer.
I’m appearing on one of their new, green shows (‘Supper Club’) soon and the producer was walking through the format with me. She paused during our conversation: “What does ‘green’ mean now anyway?”
To be sure this producer knows full well what “green” means. But she was asking an astute question about the way in which the green label is being used. Is it to define global warming? Is it about natural resources? Recycling? Actions? Things? What?
For example today, Earth Day, of course, there is a lot of discussion about all things green. Many green web sites are choosing to ignore the day to make the case that it should be like any other. (We should be green every day is their point.) Last year many green sites even pooh-poohed Earth Day as a marketing ploy.
Sure, lots of products are being launched today. You’ll read about new books, films, web sites, even cleaning essentials. (Clorox announced a new line today.) Still, environmentalists should look to Earth Day itself before questioning the dilution of the word “green” to mean all things and be part of what’s known as commercial greenwashing.
Earth Day, founded in 1970, says it is “committed to expanding the definition of ‘environment’ to include all issues that affect our health, our communities and our environment, such as air and water pollution, deteriorating schools, public transportation and access to jobs, rising rates of asthma and cancer, and lack of funding for parks and recreation.”
That’s a pretty broad definition of the word “environment.” It even makes “green” look too narrow.
