You can call it direct mail, you can call it junk mail, but the real question is, can you ever call it green? An article in The New York Times tells us that some direct marketing companies, along with their clients, are trying to move in that direction.  Called the Green Marketing Coalition, these companies are trying to establish best practices standards to make mailings more environmentally responsible.
Direct mail isn’t going to go away any time soon - the Times notes that the practice creates an average of $12 in revenue per dollar spent. Â However, the Green Marketing Coalition claims to be doing what it can to make the process cleaner. Â However, according to the Times,
So far, the coalition’s guidelines are long on earnestness and short on truly new ideas. They include using chlorine-free recycled paper, proofreading marketing materials using Adobe PDF files rather than hard copies, and taking advantages of tax benefits that come from certain green initiatives.
They also suggest better “list hygiene,” which is to remove dead people and non-responders from the list. The Postal Service, as well, has attempted to green these mailings. Â It’s website “now lists green tips for marketers, like letting people easily opt out of mailings, using water-based inks and recycled materials, and encouraging customers to recycle the mailing after reading it.”
However, the article also notes that neither the Coalation or the USPS has set specific goals or timetables for any changes. Â Environmentalist response has been, we are told, is one more of “amusement” rather than “outrage.”
‘It’s hard to argue against any well-intentioned effort to use more recycled paper, but the idea of greening junk mail is still a bit like putting lipstick on a pig,’ said Todd J. Paglia, executive director of ForestEthics, a nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting forests.
Of course, some might argue that Miss Piggy, for example, is quite striking, but I think that would be missing the forest for the trees (pun intended that time).
To opt out of direct mailings, you can spend a good amount of money on some private services, or you can takepart and opt out on a less reliable basis, but it only costs a buck.
CATEGORIES: Education, Environment, Ethics, Peace
Related Posts:
Stay Informed with TakePart:
Get Blog Updates:
Blogroll
- AlterNet
- Amnesty International Livewire
- b-listed
- Boing Boing
- Brave New Films
- CauseCast
- Changents
- Climate Crisis
- Democracy Now!
- Ecorazzi
- EdNews
- Environmental News Network
- Ethicurean
- GOOD
- Grist
- Harvard World Health News
- Huffington Post
- Human Rights Watch
- Inhabitat
- Meatless Monday
- Media Matters
- NewsTrust
- NRDC Switchboard
- Rock The Vote
- SEED Magazine
- SocialVibe
- Sustainablog
- TechPresident
- The Daily Dish
- The Democracy Center
- Think Progress
- TreeHugger
- Truthout
- Why Tuesday?
- Worldchanging


You can also sign the petition to kick start a Do Not Mail Registry at donotmail.org .
With deforestation accounting for 20% of all global carbon emissions (more than planes, trains, and automobiles combined), it’s clear that this outdated 20th century practice will not help us meet the challenges of the 21st.
Sign the petition at donotmail.org
When it comes to going “green”, direct mailers are just like makers of household cleaning products who switch to so-called “friendlier” chemical compounds. Simply slapping an austere label on a product or using water-based inks, doesn’t change the environmental impact of the resultant waste.
While I abhor junk mail, it’s not always clear which direct mailings constitute “junk”. In an effort to go greener, a group I am part of wiped out our newsletter in favor of online communication. We almost wiped out the group in the process, because, as we quickly discovered, our membership is not yet that technically savvy and sometimes a succinct paper message is indeed a good idea. I would favor a “do not mail” list if it leaves room for legitimate, non-commercial communications.