Greenpeace Contributes To Dallas Visual Pollution

Posted on June 16th, 2008 9:16am by Wick Allison
Filed under Advertising

Greenpeace recently bought a billboard on 183 for the specific purpose, no doubt, of getting someone like me to point it out. Here is Dallas-based Kimberly-Clark’s statement on its practices, and here is Greenpeace’s response, if you want to get up to date on the argument.

But why a billboard? Why is an activist environmental organization adding to our city’s already-polluted visual landscape? To make amends, Greenpeace people, cancel that billboard contract and send the money you save to Scenic Dallas. Stop polluting our environment.

UPDATE: i received an email from Daniel Kessler of Greenpeace: “In response to your post on Greenpeace’s choice of using a billboard to communicate with the leadership at Kimberly-Clark, allow me to say that we’ve been trying to sit down with the company for three years and this tactic is just the latest reminder to them that Greenpeace will not stop until Kimberly-Clark changes their business practices. The billboard is positioned on a route commonly traveled by K-C leadership and our hope is that they’ll see the billboard and reconsider their refusal to sit with us to find solutions to forest destruction. We court dialogue, not conflict, but without any other channels, we’ve selected this medium.”

Daniel has perfected the art of the non-answer answer. Next time, Dan, address my point: why Greenpeace is polluting the enviornment to save the environment.

16 comments

  1. Scenic Dallas — now there’s an oxymoron. Right up there with World Peace.

    @ 9:25 am on June 16, 2008

  2. Um, wouldn’t there be another advertisement on said billboard if that one wasn’t there? Is that not the specific reason of the billboard owner to sell billboard space? Or would you rather see another billboard with another beer, gentlemen’s club or real estate ad? Those don’t come under attack for polluting our environment?

    @ 9:40 am on June 16, 2008

  3. Well said KellyK. I agree completely.

    @ 9:46 am on June 16, 2008

  4. Billboards are the canary in the mine-shaft.

    How many billboards do you see in those crumbling city-relics of the rust belt? Those cities had their businesses regulated out of existence. Who in their right mind would start a business in rural New York today?

    @ 9:55 am on June 16, 2008

  5. It wasn’t regulation, it was Unions killed the beast.

    The sundown on the Union
    Was made in the U.S.A.
    It sure was a good idea
    ‘Til greed got in the way.

    Conversely, though, Eric, how many billboards do you see in Carmel or Santa Fe? Hardly dessicated husks, those.

    @ 10:15 am on June 16, 2008

  6. If only more people used the back of their hand or the sleeve of their shirt to wipe the mucus from their nose like I do, we wouldn’t be in this mess.

    @ 11:01 am on June 16, 2008

  7. Not only is Greenpeace polluting the visual but they are polluting the minds with incorrect information.

    http://money.cnn.com/2006/09/26/magazines/fortune/pluggedin_gunther.fortune/index.htm

    who knows who is accurate in what they say, but Greenpeace isn’t telling the whole truth either

    @ 11:38 am on June 16, 2008

  8. Greenpeace will change their tune on this eventually, just like they do everything else. Just 8 years ago they were targeting (incomopentent approach as usual for Greenpeace) nuclear facilities here in the US. NOW Greenpeace is saying this “In the early 1970s when I helped found Greenpeace, I believed that nuclear energy was synonymous with nuclear holocaust, as did most of my compatriots. That’s the conviction that inspired Greenpeace’s first voyage up the spectacular rocky northwest coast to protest the testing of U.S. hydrogen bombs in Alaska’s Aleutian Islands. Thirty years on, my views have changed, and the rest of the environmental movement needs to update its views, too, because nuclear energy may just be the energy source that can save our planet from another possible disaster: catastrophic climate change.”

    These guys are eff’ing idiots. What they say now will no doubt change as their funding needs change.

    Environmentalists crack me up. Always a good laugh when they issue quotes!!

    @ 1:02 pm on June 16, 2008

  9. Oh, but I don’t use Kleenex. I use Puffs.

    @ 1:32 pm on June 16, 2008

  10. Don’t you have that person in your office that always states a problem, but never a solution?

    @ 2:37 pm on June 16, 2008

  11. Hate not have…

    @ 3:34 pm on June 16, 2008

  12. Sorry, Wick, but no beans, dude.

    @ 3:34 pm on June 16, 2008

  13. What are we supposed to do? Flick it?

    Oh wait, the underside of the office desk!!!

    (A different form of wood but same purpose.)

    @ 3:44 pm on June 16, 2008

  14. How is this billboard polluting the Earth? Its already there and its not doing anything to pollute or harm.
    Why don’t you complain about something else…like mobile billboards?

    @ 3:50 pm on June 18, 2008

  15. Seriously, what are you talking about?

    How is putting up a billboard anything close to cutting down old-growth forests?

    @ 2:28 pm on August 19, 2008

  16. This is very up-to-date info. I think I’ll share it on Digg.

    @ 6:49 am on April 15, 2009