3 ms·
Read the linked article. Nobody is arguing that there is literally no such thing as a “carbon footprint”. They are saying there was (is?) a coordinated advertis
by subjectsigma 4y ago
Read the linked article. Nobody is arguing that there is literally no such thing as a “carbon footprint”. They are saying there was (is?) a coordinated advertisement campaign designed to help distract people away from supporting legislation of corporations themselves.
Whose fault is it that all those bottles are in the ocean - people who bought them and threw them out, or the people who made them in the first place? PepsiCo definitely wants you to think a certain way.
- pksebben 4y agoit's not the first time, either. Recall the "weeping native" ad campaign [1]. 1 https://www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/commentary/ct-perspec-indian-crying-environment-ads-pollution-1123-20171113-story.html https://www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/commentary/ct-perspec...
- tome 4y agoI don't understand how it makes sense for PepsiCo to want consumers to think that way, because rectifying the fault would involve consumers purchasing less from PepsiCo.
- s1artibartfast 4y agoThe belief, as I understand it is that it is not the consumer's fault, but PepsiCo's. Therefore, consumers should not have to change any behavior, but PepsiCo should have to clean up the bottles. Within this belief framework, if PepsiCo wants people to still buy bottles but recycle, Pepsico is evading the clean up and passing it on to the consumers/public.