While everyone’s out there talking about the indictment of former President Donald Trump, everyone apparently is not talking about green initiatives. According to a recent article in the Wall Street Journal, companies have significantly fallen off in terms of speaking about sustainable practices. And this is a great concern, because in our society where corporations call the shots, Americans cannot afford for businesses not to advance important climate change conversations.
“Green hushing” is what they’re calling it, that, when it becomes a bigger part of a larger corporate strategy to try to veer away from divisive subjects concerning the environment. But I’m dying to know — how is it divisive to advocate for sustainable practices? And who are these consumers out there that are on the side of the earth running out of resources becoming unlivable and all of mankind somehow dying in an apocalyptic showdown?
Perhaps someone at DocuSign could probably tell me, because apparently, the electronic signature firm who once proudly and loudly touted its efforts to reach net zero emissions by 2050, has now gone mum. Over the last three years, they’ve really quieted down on their sustainability initiatives, carbon-neutral status and net-zero emissions.
It seems also chipmaker Qualcomm has been operating similarly. Why not talk about these things? Efforts to keep mankind alive should neither be taboo nor risque. In March, United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change made clear that we’re speeding toward catastrophe, giving us approximately 10 years to get it together before we cross the point of no return. The global average temperatures? They’re estimated to rise to 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit above pre-industrial levels around the first half of the 2030s. And according to scientists, any greater increase in temperature would result in catastrophic heat waves, flooding, drought, crop failures and species extinction, making it significantly harder for humanity to survive.
We’ll get Mad Max without any of the sequels. And we’re already seeing the consequences of climate change play out in everyday life. Just this past weekend, thousands of fish washed up on the shores of the Texas Gulf Coast, because there wasn’t enough oxygen in the water for the fish to be able to breathe. While oxygen changes in water is somewhat of a natural occurrence, don’t get me wrong, marine biologists say that it’s not natural to the extent that we’re seeing it. And so fish are being impacted.
And speaking of impact, well it just released peer-reviewed study research report conducted by Earth Commission concluded that unless we course-correct and fast will be the ones impacted. We’re destined to experience substantial loss in life, livelihood and income, loss of access to nature’s contributions to people, loss of land, chronic disease, injury, malnutrition, and displacement. How is human existence a political issue? How is it divisive polarizing? Do these companies not realize that they cannot survive without consumers who are actually alive? It’s as frustrating as it is foolish to stay silent about things that are vital to your organization and everything that exists. Companies should be speaking up and standing up, rather than trying to toe the line in hopes of keeping everyone happy and raking in profits at the same time. As an old Greek proverb said, “Only when the last tree has died, and the last river has been poisoned, and the last fish caught, will we realize we cannot eat money.
Commentary
Our commentary partners will help you reach your own conclusions on complex topics.
The impact of hurricanes on oil and energy supplies
18 hrs ago Peter ZeihanThe future of Taiwan and advanced semiconductor chips
Yesterday Peter ZeihanThe self-inflicted downfall of Mexican energy
Friday Peter ZeihanWill the far-right take over Germany (again)?
Thursday Peter ZeihanCompanies go quiet on climate change to avoid culture war fallout
By Straight Arrow News
Tackling climate change and net-zero goals used to be a regular part of corporate America’s public relations missions. But as culture-war boycotts take a costly toll on brands like Bud Light and Target, many companies are going quiet on potentially divisive green initiatives, to avoid potential fallout.
Straight Arrow News contributor Adrienne Lawrence wonders when protecting the planet became a divisive issue and explains why companies need to rethink their strategy.
“Green hushing” is what they’re calling it, that [sic] when it becomes a bigger part of a larger corporate strategy to try to veer away from divisive subjects concerning the environment. But I’m dying to know — how is it divisive to advocate for sustainable practices? And who are these consumers out there that are on the side of the earth running out of resources becoming unlivable and all of mankind somehow dying in an apocalyptic showdown?
Perhaps someone at DocuSign could probably tell me, because apparently the electronic signature firm who once proudly and loudly touted its efforts to reach net zero emissions by 2050, has now gone mum. Over the last three years, they’ve really quieted down on their sustainability initiatives, carbon-neutral status, and net-zero emissions. It seems also chipmaker Qualcomm has been operating similarly.
Why not talk about these things? Efforts to keep mankind alive should neither be taboo nor risqué. In March, United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change made clear that we’re speeding toward catastrophe, giving us approximately 10 years to get it together before we cross the point of no return. The global average temperatures — they’re estimated to rise to 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit above pre-industrial levels around the first half of the 2030s. And according to scientists, any greater increase in temperature would result in catastrophic heat waves, flooding, drought, crop failures, and species extinction, making it significantly harder for humanity to survive.
While everyone’s out there talking about the indictment of former President Donald Trump, everyone apparently is not talking about green initiatives. According to a recent article in the Wall Street Journal, companies have significantly fallen off in terms of speaking about sustainable practices. And this is a great concern, because in our society where corporations call the shots, Americans cannot afford for businesses not to advance important climate change conversations.
“Green hushing” is what they’re calling it, that, when it becomes a bigger part of a larger corporate strategy to try to veer away from divisive subjects concerning the environment. But I’m dying to know — how is it divisive to advocate for sustainable practices? And who are these consumers out there that are on the side of the earth running out of resources becoming unlivable and all of mankind somehow dying in an apocalyptic showdown?
Perhaps someone at DocuSign could probably tell me, because apparently, the electronic signature firm who once proudly and loudly touted its efforts to reach net zero emissions by 2050, has now gone mum. Over the last three years, they’ve really quieted down on their sustainability initiatives, carbon-neutral status and net-zero emissions.
It seems also chipmaker Qualcomm has been operating similarly. Why not talk about these things? Efforts to keep mankind alive should neither be taboo nor risque. In March, United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change made clear that we’re speeding toward catastrophe, giving us approximately 10 years to get it together before we cross the point of no return. The global average temperatures? They’re estimated to rise to 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit above pre-industrial levels around the first half of the 2030s. And according to scientists, any greater increase in temperature would result in catastrophic heat waves, flooding, drought, crop failures and species extinction, making it significantly harder for humanity to survive.
We’ll get Mad Max without any of the sequels. And we’re already seeing the consequences of climate change play out in everyday life. Just this past weekend, thousands of fish washed up on the shores of the Texas Gulf Coast, because there wasn’t enough oxygen in the water for the fish to be able to breathe. While oxygen changes in water is somewhat of a natural occurrence, don’t get me wrong, marine biologists say that it’s not natural to the extent that we’re seeing it. And so fish are being impacted.
And speaking of impact, well it just released peer-reviewed study research report conducted by Earth Commission concluded that unless we course-correct and fast will be the ones impacted. We’re destined to experience substantial loss in life, livelihood and income, loss of access to nature’s contributions to people, loss of land, chronic disease, injury, malnutrition, and displacement. How is human existence a political issue? How is it divisive polarizing? Do these companies not realize that they cannot survive without consumers who are actually alive? It’s as frustrating as it is foolish to stay silent about things that are vital to your organization and everything that exists. Companies should be speaking up and standing up, rather than trying to toe the line in hopes of keeping everyone happy and raking in profits at the same time. As an old Greek proverb said, “Only when the last tree has died, and the last river has been poisoned, and the last fish caught, will we realize we cannot eat money.
Trump’s disastrous economic plan will add trillions to national debt
We must do better at protecting journalists and free speech
UK far-right riots signal dire global consequences if Trump wins
Congress must act urgently to fix our broken Supreme Court
Autism doesn’t cause violence, despite Brendan Depa’s case
Underreported stories from each side
Ann Arbor police, University of Michigan probing suspected ‘bias-motivated assault’ of Jewish student
25 sources | 9% from the left Getty ImagesRussian election interference efforts targeting Harris campaign, Microsoft finds
16 sources | 13% from the right ReutersLatest Stories
Hezbollah blames Israel for deadly pager explosions
Operation Hard Kill’s counter-drone warfare showcased: Weapon of the week
Filling in capability gaps with Lockheed Martin’s hypersonic weapon: The Mako
Going hypersonic with the Mako missile: Weapons and Warfare
Republicans block Right to IVF Act, Democrats have done the same to them
Popular Opinions
In addition to the facts, we believe it’s vital to hear perspectives from all sides of the political spectrum.
DOJ guidance on voter list maintenance targets election integrity
13 hrs ago Ben WeingartenTucker Carlson’s free speech isn’t a blank check for hate speech
19 hrs ago Ruben NavarretteWhat could impact US election in the final weeks that remain?
Yesterday David PakmanIn debate, Harris proved that Trump will only ever serve himself
Friday Dr. Rashad Richey