Good at Kolumne:
Selina Holesinsky

Failing a second time, after the Paris climate summit in 2015, would not only raise the question of the purpose of these climate summits, but also the worldwide political and economic will to change. Isn’t it good then, that brands talk about sustainability at the very least? Like all good questions in life, this also deserves a yes and no answer. Yes, it is good, because it shows the effort and awareness of brands to integrate sustainable measures of all sorts into their thinking and doing. And even if brands use sustainability without even knowing what it means, put it in the washer and take it out as a pink sock, they still keep the conversation going and hopefully will be identified as the pink sock they are. No, it is horrible because, in terms of brand strategy and the landscape of brands that talk about sustainability at the very second, the vague, eroded terms used become a CSR topic, a hygiene factor, and for some even a safe ticket to fall through the gutter. But, here it is, the infamous but. Some businesses put sustainable efforts at the very heart of their brand and excel. Take advertiser’s most beloved example Patagonia, which not only brings the attitude to the table but breathes its mission through its fearless founder Yvon Chouinard. And here comes the crucial aspect: Attitude. If you can’t live, breathe and go through with it, go for either a different purpose or none at all. Cutting through the sustainable noise out there with a me-too attitude, you will die in the Meta Ad or any other Media Graveyard the second you click promote.