Marketing and advertising has changed…drastically. With the onslaught of electronic media, brand awareness and brand management are no longer controlled by what the audience sees on the television or hears on the radio. User content, an instant call out to someone or anyone who cares to listen, controls the brands of today.

I quote Leon Panetta, head of the Central Intelligence Agency on cyber warfare, “It could paralyze this country, and I think that’s an area we have to pay a lot more attention to.” That scenario is already playing out on the battlefields of Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and the likes. Anyone recall P&G’s PR nightmare?

P&G dismiss Dry Max Pampers rash rumors

New York | Thu May 6, 2010 8:10 pm EDT

New York (Reuters) – Proctor & Gamble Co called reports that its mew Pampers with Dry Max cause rashes and other skin irritations “completely false” as it aimed to contain a public relations threat to its biggest diaper innovation in 25 years.

The world’s largest household products company said on Thursday that Pampers has been the subject of “completely false rumors fueled by social media.”

Rather the rumors are true or not, this is a substantial threat to the branding strategies of Proctor & Gamble’s “biggest diaper innovation in 25 years,” temporarily paralyzing P&G’s national launch. Now damage control begins and at what cost? It could be immeasurable. Case in point, the venue I use now!

I was speaking with a business acquaintance and potential client recently when our discussion turned to his company’s communications collateral. I asked to see his existing print communication piece promoting his alternative energy company. When he produced the piece for review, I was astonished at the design and printing procedures used for an alternative energy company touting the use of Eco-friendly energy policies. Their communications spoke exactly the opposite of the Eco-friendly company and brand they are presently trying to build.

Now this is not the fault of the owner, he knows sun, wind and geothermal energies, not brand building. Rather, this is a case of an inexperienced design team using shortsighted branding approaches in the implementation of his brand. They produced the traditional 8.5 x 11, four-page brochure, on gloss stock using four color process oil based inks, with UV coating. Now most of that lingo might sound a little foreign to most, but to a trained professional this knowledge is essential when designing in general, and vital when branding for green companies.

Eco-friendly design principals incorporate many faucets throughout the design process. Small things such as sizing specifics, number of colors used, type of paper used, coating styles, ink types and techniques used in the printing process, all contribute to less aggression towards our natural resources.

For instance, soy based inks vs. oil based inks that are not easily recycled, metallic inks containing metal flake lengthening the decomposing process once discarded, and the worse offender, UV coating; an Ultra-violet coating that is applied to the stock and dried by exposure to UV radiation, a power absorbing procedure. The same effect can be accomplished through the original printing process using a technique called strike through, at less cost and much less offensive to the power grid.

Eco-friendly branding does not start and end with the development of a logo. It must be the mind-set incorporated throughout your organization to the highest extent possible. Beginning with power source, carrying over to operational procedures and represented appropriately through your branding strategies.

Your brand is your word – make sure it speaks accurately.

The recent catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico has revived the term Green Washing. The act of promoting ecological observances and practices in the operation and/or products of ones company when in fact, proven practices show otherwise.

On April 20^th 2010, the Deepwater Horizon offshore oil rig exploded killing eleven people, and two days later sinking into the abyss shearing the well head that is now spewing up to 210,000 gallons of oil a day into the Gulf of Mexico. Early speculation falls to the wellhead cement-sealing job Halliburton performed prior to the rig exploding. Upon further review and congressional hearings more information has come to surface, basically the Oil Industry has pretty much been regulating itself, cozy in the arms of the MMS, and stipulating the precautions and safety features they feel necessary to operate. Including a decision to rely on an antiquated blow out preventer that in a prepared document by Transocean, the drilling rig operator, lists 260 “failure modes.” Two hundred and sixty failure modes at 5000 feet below the waters surface where man can not tread is simply not acceptable. The untold damage of this catastrophe will haunt us well into the future.

On March 23, 2005 BP Oil experienced an explosion at their Texas City, Texas refinery killing 15 workers and injuring more than 170 others. The CBS, U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board report found that BP had failed to heed or implement safety recommendations made before the blast.

On March 2^nd, 2006 BP Exploration Alaska discovered an oil spill in western Prudhoe Bay, Alaska. Initial estimates put the spill at 267,000 US gallons spilled over roughly 2 acres. Later, Alaska’s unified command ratified the volume to 212,252 gallons. In November 2007, BP Exploration Alaska pled guilty to negligent discharge of Oil, a misdemeanor. They paid $20 million in fines, the cause…corroding pipelines.

BP Oil posted pre-tax profits for 2009 of $13.96 billion dollars. BP Oil’s pre-tax profit for 2008 was $25.59 billion.

BP Oil spent $76 million dollars on television and radio last year branding their green initiatives. In the year 2000, the “Beyond Petroleum” branding campaign launched with an estimated $200 million dollar price tag.

In the same time BP Oil is spending millions of dollars to polish their image as the “greenest” of the oil companies, they are slashing their alternative energy budget from 1.4 billion last year to 500 million this year. Beyond petroleum? As a professional that works with corporations daily in their Eco friendly branding campaign strategies my suggestion is this, don’t talk the talk unless you are going to walk the walk. It will come back to bite you. This lack of foresight driven by a bottom line mentality will cause major opposition to the oil industries efforts to pursue offshore drilling and rightly so, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to know that at 5000 feet below the water surface, where the pressure is estimated at 1 ton per square inch, man is very much out of his element.