Under the heading of meaningful action, the article in the url below contains an interesting story:
"The Guardian will no longer accept advertising from oil and gas companies, becoming the first major global news organisation to institute an outright ban on taking money from companies that extract fossil fuels."
This is part of a larger effort by The Guardian to respond to growing concerns about climate change – these range from referring to the issue as the "climate emergency" (as opposed to 'climate change') and also reducing the organization's carbon footprint (a commitment to be "carbon-neutral by 2030, while also almost entirely divesting its Scott Trust endowment fund from fossil fuel investments"):
"The move … will be implemented with immediate effect. The ban will apply to any business primarily involved in extracting fossil fuels, including many of the world's largest polluters."
This decision is meaningful not for the impact it will have on fossil fuel firms (although, that would change if every media company did this), but more in terms of the sacrifice being made by The Guardian:
"The decision to reject the advertising money from fossil fuel firms comes at a tricky time for the media industry, with the Guardian Media Group board warning the business is facing substantial headwinds this year. Advertising makes up 40% of GMG revenue, meaning it remains a key way to fund the journalism produced by Guardian and Observer journalists around the world."
Although an important step, the newspaper avoided taking the more dramatic step demanded by some:
"… some readers would like the company to turn down advertising for any product with a significant carbon footprint, such as cars or holidays, but [the company] said this was not financially sustainable while the media industry's business model remained in crisis."
In other words, given the precarious nature of newspaper finances today, this is a risk and one the paper feels it will be rewarded for. In other words, it has listened to its stakeholders and responded with substantive action. In order for this to be sustained, readers need to demonstrate that they support what the firm has done, recognize there is a financial cost associated with it, and ensure that cost does not fundamentally damage the organization:
"The campaign group Greenpeace welcomed the move. 'This is a watershed moment, and the Guardian must be applauded for this bold move to end the legitimacy of fossil fuels,' said Mel Evans, senior climate campaigner for Greenpeace UK."
Unfortunately, Greenpeace was not proposing a way for the newspaper to replace the revenue that will be lost by refusing these ads. Nevertheless, I was pleased to see that the story was picked up in other major newspapers (e.g., here).
Take care
David
David Chandler
© Sage Publications, 2020
Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler5e
Strategic CSR Simulation: http://www.strategiccsrsim.com/
The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: https://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/
Guardian to ban advertising from fossil fuel firms
Guardian to ban advertising from fossil fuel firms
By Jim Waterson
January 29, 2020
The Guardian
