Greenwash

There is a growing literature on risk communications, much of which is aimed at advising corporations on how to deal with the fears that their operations engender in the community. In the magazine Cash Flow David Katz writes of the increasing need for risk communication consultants by companies with "existing or potential pollution liabilities....to help cool down the furor and thus curb their risks." The risks he is talking about here are not the health and environmental risks to the community but the risks to the company of regulation and law suits. He suggests risk communicators could help such companies "to communicate with the press and public to sway the government and to develop strategic plans to deal with pollution regulators."

Many risk communicators concentrate on developing ways to effectively explain findings of the risk assessments done by company experts, and therefore to reassure it the public:

the self-imposed task of risk communicators is to disseminate various truths to an audience that is deficient in some fundamental and obstructive way, beyond 'ignorance of the facts'. Those to whom risk assessments need to be communicated are perceived to lack reason or be hampered by an assortment of psychological and political disabilities—bias, special interest, ideological commitment, and so forth. (Beder and Shortland 1992, pp. 139-40)

Joe Epley, past president of the Public Relations Society of America, writes of the need for international public relations because "public opinion, fueled by hysteria, a desire to live in a risk-free environment, and unfounded perceptions of the industrial world, is making it difficult for many manufacturers to operate on either a local or global basis."

Risk communication aims to correct the public's 'false' view of risk. Some risk communicators acknowledge that many of the factors influencing a person's perception of risk are quite rational, for example whether the risk is imposed or voluntary. They nonetheless seek to change perceptions rather than reduce risks. For example, Peter Sandman's well used formula, Risk = Hazard + Outrage, is used by companies and government agencies trying to get community acceptance for hazardous facilities to work out ways to reduce outrage rather than to reduce the hazard. This is done by concentrating on communicating the concern, honesty and trustworthiness of the organisation proposing the additional risks.

For example, Stuart Price, a communications consultant who has worked for Westinghouse Electric Corporation, advises in an article on Learning to Remove Fear from Radioactive Waste that "bringing concerned citizens into the decision-making process, rather than just launching one-way information packets in their direction, is a technique that can build good will and resolve many fears." He recommends the use of advisory boards with local residents, environmentalists and workers on them and regulators and waste generators present to provide expert advise and explain the ÔrealityÕ behind the newspaper headlines.

These are all suggestions that have been taken up by the Responsible Care program which was thought up by the Canadian Chemical Producers Association and is now subscribed to by chemical industries in many countries including the UK, USA and Australia. Responsible Care is aimed at restoring the declining image of the chemical industry, rebuilding trust and avoiding more regulation. It uses voluntary codes of practice, open days and public advisory panels to achieve these ends.

Of course when something does go wrong there is a whole new set of public relations experts, crisis communicators, ready to swing into action. Crisis PR manages public perception following industrial accidents, the public uncovering of adverse effects of a product, and corporate mistakes. In their literature these crisis experts frequently cite the aftermath of the Exxon Valdez ship wreck, which spewed tons of oil over pristine arctic wilderness, as a prime example of public relations gone wrong. The aftermath they refer to is Exxon's fallen reputation rather than the oil soaked coastline and marine life. In the world of PR, problems arise from the failure to communicate strategically, not from wrongful activity. The hundreds of articles in PR magazines and books that cover the Exxon Valdez accident almost invariably focus on how Exxon could have handled public relations better. However, as journalist Craig Mellow points out; "For all the stress on strategic counseling, no one talked about whether Exxon should have had better hiring or emergency-response policies beforehand." (1989, p. 39)

The advice that crisis communicators give, is therefore aimed at restoring reputation rather than preventing reoccurences or fixing the physical consequences of the disaster. The problem is not reality but the perception of reality. The sort of advice that is given to companies for dealing with a major incident includes firstly ensuring the top company executive goes to the scene of the accident immediately to show that s/he cares: "Images of strong emotional responses must be captured (for which the chief will be trained by a crisis communicator). Executive hands and shoes must be soiled for the camera." (Dowie 1994, p. 32)

Corporations are also advised that television cameras should be kept away from meetings between the company and the aggrieved community to avoid mass broadcasts of angry citizens. Company representatives should dress to identify with the community and if at all possible the company should be portrayed as a victim, suffering as a result of an accident it could not prevent. Harold Burson of Burson-Marsteller also advises that is important to 'control' media coverage and arrange employee interviews: "Failing to make witnesses available will lead to media efforts to obtain interviews on their own, either outside the gates or at the local watering hole. Control is the important element here." (Quoted in Tymson and Sherman 1990, p. 223)

...back to top

Beder, Sharon, and Michael Shortland, (1992) 'Siting a hazardous waste facility: the tangled web of risk communication', Public Understanding of Science, vol. 1: 139-160.

Dowie, Mark, ( 1994) 'Saving Face: Could Public Relations have Rescued Exxon's Image', Propaganda Review, no. 11: 32-34

Epley, Joe S., (1992) 'Public relations in the global village: an American perspective', Public Relations Review, vol. 18, no. 2: 109-116.

Katz, David M., (1993) 'Press role eyed for pollution consultants', Cash Flow, vol. 97, no. 20: 1, 49.

Mellow, Craig, (1989) 'Remaking PR's Image', Across the Board, vol. 26, no. 7: 33-39.

Price, Stuart V., (1994) 'Learning to Remove Fear from Radioactive Waste', Public Relations Quarterly, vol. 39, no. 3: 32-34.

Tymson, Candy, and Bill Sherman, (1990) The Australian Public Relations Manual, revised ed, Sydney: Millenium Books.

...back to top