As businesses race to promote their sustainability credentials, the gap between claims and actual performance is under greater scrutiny. The ACCC is actively cracking down on misleading environmental messaging, targeting everything from slogans to colours and design elements.
For many brands, the challenge lies in knowing where to start. With evolving regulations, pressure to appear green, and industry jargon muddying the waters, even well-meaning brands can overstep. But clarity is power - and understanding key terminology is the first step toward credible communication.
Why Language Matters
Words like carbon neutral, net zero, and zero emissions are everywhere. They sound reassuring, but they mean very different things — and misusing them can erode credibility fast.
- Carbon Neutral means that a person, organisation, or product balances the emissions it produces by removing or offsetting an equal amount.
While carbon neutrality can be an important first step, the focus is on using offsets to balance emissions in the short term, and not necessarily on reducing overall emissions.
- Carbon offsets can include reforestation or investment in clean energy projects.
- To become carbon neutral, companies first need to calculate their emissions by measuring their carbon footprint using data such as electricity consumption, business travel, and purchased products.
- Carbon offsets can include reforestation or investment in clean energy projects.
- Net Zero means prioritising deep emission reduction (up to 90%) to get to as close to zero as possible across the organisation’s entire value chain - from shipping, to manufacturing, to product use.Offsets are only used for any remaining, unavoidable emissions.Net Zero is a long-term and comprehensive approach that tackles the root cause of climate change.
- A company may work towards being Net Zero by switching all their energy to renewables and transition to a circular economy.To avoid the most extreme consequences of climate change and preserve a liveable planet, the Paris Agreement tells us we need to cut global emissions by 45% by 2030 and reach net zero by 2050.
- A company may work towards being Net Zero by switching all their energy to renewables and transition to a circular economy.To avoid the most extreme consequences of climate change and preserve a liveable planet, the Paris Agreement tells us we need to cut global emissions by 45% by 2030 and reach net zero by 2050.
- Zero Emissions is where a product, service, or activity generates no greenhouse gas emissions during its operation.For example, a wind turbine generating electricity solely from wind power would be considered a zero-emission source.
The focus is on the the absence of emissions during a specific process.
- A company or organisation can aim for zero emissions, however this means no greenhouse gases are released — which is extremely hard for an entire company to achieve across all operations, supply chains, and outputs.
- A company or organisation can aim for zero emissions, however this means no greenhouse gases are released — which is extremely hard for an entire company to achieve across all operations, supply chains, and outputs.
These distinctions matter. Vague or inflated language can unintentionally mislead audiences, while precise, evidence-backed language builds trust. Net zero targets, while promising, can become a form of greenwashing if they delay real emission cuts or rely too heavily on offsets. To be credible, they must include near-term reduction goals and transparent reporting.
Every part of your sustainability message - including visuals - should reflect genuine action. Greenwashing isn’t always in the copy; it often hides in the imagery. Trees, oceans, or badges resembling certifications can imply environmental credentials that don’t exist. Even colour choices like green and blue, when paired with vague claims, can give a misleading impression.
When 'Green' Branding Goes Wrong
It’s important to learn from past mistakes and take away improvements from our peers. Between June 2021 and July 2023, Clorox Australia marketed its “GLAD to be Green” kitchen and garbage bags as being made from “50% ocean plastic” or “50% ocean-bound plastic.” The packaging and branding falsely implied a direct environmental benefit to consumers, without substantiated evidence.
The alleged “ocean plastic” was sourced from waste collected up to 50 km inland in Indonesian communities - nowhere near genuine ocean-bound waste. Furthermore, the prominent green-themed banding, coupled with the recycled claim, created a misleading impression of genuine eco-credentials.
Here’s a breakdown of exactly why the copy and icons on the Clorox (GLAD) packaging were misleading—according to the Federal Court and ACCC’s findings:
1. Misleading Prominent Claims vs. Subtle Reality
- The packaging featured bold declarations like “50% Ocean Plastic Recycled Bags” and *“Made using 50% Ocean Plastic”**, paired with a wave image, blue-tone design, and “GLAD to be GREEN” branding—strongly suggesting the plastic originated directly from the ocean.
- In reality, the recycled content was sourced from communities in Indonesia up to 50 km inland, not from the ocean or shoreline.
2. Visual Cues Reinforced the Ocean Connection
These visual elements weren't accidental—they played a pivotal role:
- Blue packaging, wave imagery, and “green” branding collectively implied a direct environmental benefit tied to oceans.
- The Court concluded these design choices “connoted a relationship between the Products and the ocean” and that the green colour implied environmental-friendliness.
3. Fine Print Was Ineffective
- While small disclaimers did clarify: “Made using 50% ocean bound plastic that is collected from communities with no formal waste management system within 50 km of the shoreline,” these were in tiny font on the back panel and failed to correct the dominant front-of-pack message.
- Even after changes in 2022 to echo “ocean bound plastic,” the overall misleading impression persisted because the original prominent claims remained on the front packaging.
4. Impact on Consumers and Fair Competition
- The ACCC noted that consumers have limited ability to verify such claims and rely heavily on visible messaging when choosing products.
- Such packaging undermines consumer trust and unfairly disadvantages competitors who offer accurate environmental claims
This case serves as a cautionary tale - especially in the Australian market, where regulators are increasingly scrutinising environmental claims. It underscores the need to ground every sustainability statement in evidence, clarity, and transparency.
Lessons for Marketers
The Clorox case isn’t just about one brand. It’s a wake-up call for anyone communicating sustainability.
- Don’t rely on vague sourcing. If you say “ocean plastic,” make sure it’s actually sourced from the ocean — and be able to prove it.
- Avoid misleading brand cues. Logos, colour palettes, and imagery can create as much false impression as copy.
- Substantiate everything. Back claims with independent evidence, and be prepared to share it.
- Factor in legal and reputational risk. A sustainability message that doesn’t stand up to scrutiny isn’t worth the short-term gain.
As Nina Drakalovic, our Head of Brand and Impact Strategy, puts it: “In Australia, ACCC rules demand accuracy in sustainability claims; exaggeration risks fines and lost trust.”
How Brands Can Get it Right
Avoiding greenwashing isn’t just about avoiding penalties — it’s about building a brand that stands out for the right reasons. Here are a few practical steps:
- Audit your claims. Check every statement, label, and visual cue for accuracy.
- Be specific. Instead of “eco-friendly,” explain exactly what makes your product or service sustainable.
- Show your workings. Publish methodologies, data sources, and near-term goals, not just long-term ambitions.
- Tell stories, not slogans. Share the human and environmental impact of your efforts, not just the marketing line.
- Commit to transparency. If you’re not there yet, say so — and show how you’re working towards improvement.
Avoiding greenwashing isn’t just about playing it safe – it’s about standing out for the right reasons. Consumers and regulators in Australia now demand transparency, so the brands that lead will be those who back up bold sustainability goals with honest storytelling and real action. Now is the time to audit your communications and commit to genuine sustainability messaging. By doing so, you’ll stay on the right side of the law and win the trust of your customers.
In the long run, honesty and clarity in sustainability communications will set you apart, earning you customer loyalty and helping drive real environmental impact – a win-win for your business and the planet. By embracing transparency and integrity now, you’ll not only avoid greenwashing pitfalls but also position your brand as a trusted sustainability leader in Australia’s market.