This originally appeared in the 2024 Spring issue of strategy magazine.

I distinctly remember the day my personal credo locked horns with the industry I cover. It was Sept. 12, 2023. Strategy’s publisher Lisa Faktor had just texted me the link to Apple’s new “Mother Nature” commercial, knowing I would appreciate the brazenness of its climate-conscious messaging. I did. Who wouldn’t? I read the LinkedIn posts that day. Almost all were left positively charged after watching Mother Nature (played by actress Octavia Spencer) grill the behemoth corporation, demanding tangible action over empty promises. It’s a brilliant piece of marketing that airbrushed Apple as an eco-saviour. Some called it a “masterclass” in sustainability communications. And I’m willing to bet it went straight into many a creative’s “I wish I’d done that” mental folder.

Pretty soon after coming out of my fangirl haze, though, I remembered the internal battle I wage with Apple, and so many others like Apple. The words “planned obsolescence” kept head-butting my excitement over the ad, until I started to feel myself become, admittedly, incensed. Knowing that “durability” is not in the brand’s vocabulary and its avoidance of addressing the practice of purposely designing frail phones that last, at best, two years, got me questioning other smoke-screens brands are building under the guise of ESG.

It’s no wonder purpose marketing is under attack. A culture war is growing down south, with the right wing calling out the hypocrisy of “woke capitalism” and dismissing it as “elitist” or disconnected from profits. Businesses are being slammed for pursuing progressive values – rather than money (their raison d’être). And there are economic pressures, too: ESG concerns are not at the top of orgs’ priority list. They used to be #1, now they’re #3, according to Google research. Execs are cutting corners in their eco initiatives, as they’re forced to achieve the same results with less money.

Forgive me, for I am not a nihilist. However I am a realist. I’m not advocating for brands to scale back on their ESG commitments in response to these socio-economic forces. I recognize that today marketers face the questions: should we go on, but talk about our efforts less? Or continue full steam ahead with our marcom, knowing that consumers want someone to step in (when governments can’t/won’t)? I don’t have the answers, although I’d like to give a reco, not as an editor, but as a human being with skin in this game of life – talk about your brand’s actual purpose, not what you think it should be. And don’t use the environment to sell phones designed for waste. It’s not a good look.