Monday, September 23, 2013

Greenwashing

With Greenwashing, I think Welling introduces a fresh argument about how we are being fed a false image of what nature really is. Especially with this contemporary audience being progressive, I think it questions not the theory, but us as the consumers. How naive are we really when it comes to social issues? Do we not spark our own thoughts or opinions and process information cautiously?

What’s really happening is that individuals are automatically supporting environmental issues based on a glamorized or dressed-up ad that they see.
 
Environmental agencies put out these announcements, that they intentionally alter, in order to make a point; hence the term ecoporn or greenwashing. Now, Welling clarifies that this isn’t representations of “zoosexuality or with pornography featuring human sexual contact with [nature]” (56). However, the author is pointing out that the two go hand-in-hand for ecoporn is just as widespread and destructive. In ecoporn “landforms and nonhumans” represent the female body in pornography, however the only distinction is that with ecoporn there is no physical way of “[getting off]”; no arousal (56). It’s only intended for a rapid and simple visual consumption; perfect for the attention span of the average viewer. The actual image varies dependent upon the message. There may be an image of a bird coated in oil or one may see a photo of a heavenly vacation spot in the islands.

Either way, the viewer is getting a phony perception of what is reality. Welling also points out that there’s this serious “obsession with explicitly sexuality and violent death” (59). Which is evident not only with advertising but with entertainment, where nature is the victimizer. Before, sharks were depicted as predators and we as the victims; “what formerly endangered us is now endanger by us” (59). One may argue that there is this sense of immediacy where these ads try to appeal to an individual’s emotions. Is this wrong for an agency to exploit the public for monetary or reputational gain? Or, is it exploitation? Maybe, abuse of power?

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.