Mercedes Accused of Greenwashing with ‘Nature or Nothing’ Ads
Automaker’s environmental record speaks for itself.
A growing number of consumers say they’re willing to pay more for products with a sustainability message. But when ads make something sound better for the environment than it actually is, that is called greenwashing.
Here’s a roundup of companies that have been accused of not being as environmentally friendly as advertised (Note: NAD is the National Advertising Division and ASA is the Advertising Standards Authority).
| Product/Company (Date and Type of Inquiry) | Allegation(s) | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| HSBC Bank
(October 2022 ASA inquiry) |
Claiming to help clients transition to net zero while failing to disclose its role in the climate crisis – i.e., financing industries that emit notable levels of greenhouse gases. | In addition to banning the ads, the ASA told HSBC that future ads featuring environmental claims must not omit such material information. |
| United Airlines’ customer carbon offset program
(September 2022 ad alert) |
Encouraging customers to offset their flight while the airline’s CEO has said most carbon offset programs are insufficient to tackle climate change | In response to an inquiry by TINA.org, United said carbon offsets are no longer a part of its “emissions reduction strategy” |
| KLM Royal Dutch Airlines’ CO2ZERO program
(September 2022 class-action lawsuit) |
Marketing that customers who purchase carbon credits offset and reduce the environmental impact of flying when purchasing credits does not negate the environmental effects of flying | Pending |
| Mercedes-Benz electric vehicles
(August 2022 ad campaign parody by London-based sustainability group Wherefrom) |
Promoting its electric vehicles with images of nature and the tagline Nature or Nothing while paying billions of dollars over emissions cheating in its diesel vehicles | Mercedes has distanced itself from the “Nature or Nothing” ad campaign |
| ECOS household cleaners and other products
(August 2022 class-action lawsuit) |
Marketing products as non-toxic, safe and earth friendly when they contain ingredients that are harmful to people and the environment | Pending |
| FIFA
(May 2022 report by Belgium-based nonprofit Carbon Market Watch) |
Advertising the 2022 FIFA World Cup in Qatar as the first-ever carbon-neutral tournament in the competition’s history when carbon credits being purchased to offset emissions are unlikely to benefit the climate | Some bad press |
| Matter Plates, Bowls and Bags √√√
(February 2022 class-action lawsuits) |
Marketing products as compostable when they contain “forever chemicals” that do not break down and never become part of usable compost | Pending |
| Kirkland Albacore Tuna √
(July 2022 class-action lawsuit) |
Advertising tuna as dolphin safe when the company uses fishing methods that seriously injure and kill dolphins and other marine life | Pending |
| H&M
(July 2022 class-action lawsuit) |
Misleading consumers about products’ environmental attributes through the use of false and misleading sustainability profiles | Pending |
| Great Value Recycling Drawstring Bags
(July 2022 class-action lawsuit) |
Marketing bags as recycling bags that are designed to handle everyday recycling loads when the bags are not made of recyclable materials and are not suitable for disposing of recyclable items | Pending |
| Thinx
(May 2022 class-action complaint) |
Advertising products as sustainable when they contain chemicals that are harmful to the environment | Pending |
| Gorton’s
(April 2022 class-action complaint) |
Marketing tilapia as sustainably sourced when the fish comes from industrial farms that use practices that destroy the environment | Pending |
| Recreational Equipment, Inc. (REI)
(April 2022 class-action complaint) |
Marketing waterproof apparel as sustainable when they contain substances that are harmful to the environment | Pending |
| Transitions2Earth
(April 2022 class-action complaint) |
Marketing utensils as biodegradable when they aren’t | Pending |
| Burger King
(April 2022 class-action complaint) |
Marketing the Whopper as sustainable when product packaging contains substances that are harmful to the environment | Pending |
| Burt’s Bees Cosmetics
(April 2022 class-action complaint) |
Advertising that ingredients come from nature and are obtained using responsible sourcing methods when they contain chemicals that harm the environment | Pending |
| Walmart
(April 2022 FTC complaint) |
Marketing dozens of rayon textile products as bamboo and claiming that the “bamboo” products were made using eco friendly processes when converting bamboo into rayon requires the use of toxic chemicals and results in hazardous pollutants | Settled |
| Kohl’s
(April 2022 FTC complaint) |
Marketing dozens of rayon textile products as bamboo and claiming that the “bamboo” products were made using eco friendly processes when converting bamboo into rayon requires the use of toxic chemicals and results in hazardous pollutants | Settled |
| McDonald’s
(March 2022 class-action complaint) |
Marketing the Big Mac and other menu items as sustainable when product packaging contains substances that are harmful to the environment | Pending |
| Simply Gum
(February 2022 NAD inquiry) |
Marketing gum as natural and biodegradable and then declining to participate in a self-regulatory inquiry into those claims | Referred to the FTC |
| Green Gobbler Drain Clog Dissolver
(February 2022 NAD inquiry) |
Marketing drain cleaner as green via the claim “power meets green” without sufficient evidence to back up the claim | NAD said the claim should be discontinued and the company said it will comply with NAD’s recommendations in future advertising |
| Whole Foods
(January 2022 class-action lawsuit) |
Touting its commitment to sustainability and environmental stewardship when its slack-filled packages use more raw materials and create more waste when packaging is discarded | Pending |
| Oatly
(January 2022 ASA inquiry) |
Overstating what one climate expert said about cutting dairy and meat from your diet to reduce your environmental impact. | In addition to banning the ad, ASA told Oatly to make the basis of any environmental claims clear to consumers. |
| Banana Boat sunscreens*
(September 2021 class-action lawsuit) |
Marketing products as reef friendly when they contain ingredients that are harmful to coral reefs and marine life | Pending |
| Dasani, Poland Spring and other bottled water brands
(June 2021 class-action lawsuit) |
Marketing products as 100% recyclable when the type of plastic used to make the caps and labels is generally not recyclable | Pending |
| Red Lobster
(June 2021 class-action lawsuit) |
Marketing Maine lobster and shrimp as sustainable when its suppliers use practices that are harmful to the environment and inhumane | Pending |
| Allbirds running shoes
(June 2021 class-action lawsuit) |
Claiming that shoes have a low carbon footprint using a tool that doesn’t assess all environmental impacts | Dismissed with prejudice |
| The Coca-Cola Company
(June 2021 private lawsuit) |
Marketing itself as sustainable and environmentally friendly while generating more plastic pollution than any other company in the world | Pending |
| Earth Rated Dog Poop Bags
(May 2021 ad alert√√) |
Encouraging consumers to use compostable dog poop bags such as theirs in an Earth Day blog, while acknowledging (in the fine print of its website) that the composting facilities where the bags must be taken don’t exist in the U.S. | After TINA.org reached out to the company, it added a disclaimer to the Earth Day blog |
| Hefty Recycling Bags**
(May 2021 class-action lawsuit) |
Claiming on product packaging that bags are designed to handle all types of recyclables when products actually contaminate would-be recyclable waste | Pending |
| Kingsford Hardwood Briquettes
(February 2021 class-action lawsuit) |
Marketing that briquettes are 100% natural and provide a cleaner burn and are less harmful to the environment when they produce more carbon dioxide and are actually more harmful to the environment than pure lump charcoal | Voluntarily dismissed |
| Repellem and Eco-Friendly Trash Bags
(December 2020 class-action lawsuit) |
Marketing trash bags as natural, biodegradable and eco-friendly when the bags are made from a chemical material and are not biodegradable or eco-friendly | Voluntarily dismissed |
| Blueland cleaning products
(October 2020 NAD inquiry) |
Marketing “[e]very piece of packaging” as 100% recyclable when certain materials are compostable, not recyclable | Company discontinued its 100% recyclable claim, as recommended by NAD |
| Quorn Foods
(September 2020 ASA inquiry) |
Misrepresenting a commitment to reducing its carbon footprint | ASA told Quorn to make the basis of any environmental claims clear to consumers |
| Tide purclean***
(August 2020 NAD inquiry) |
Representing that the laundry detergent is 100% plant-based when the product is only 75% plant-based | Company agreed to modify plant-based claims appearing on product label, per NAD’s recommendation |
| Simple Green cleaning products
(May 2020 class-action lawsuit) |
Marketing products as non-toxic when they contain ingredients harmful to people, pets and the environment | Dismissed pursuant to settlement agreement in related case |
| Krud Kutter cleaning products
(May 2020 class-action lawsuit) |
Marketing products as non-toxic and earth friendly when they contain ingredients harmful to people, pets and the environment | Pending |
| Method household cleaning products
(May 2020 class-action lawsuit) |
Marketing products as non-toxic when they contain ingredients harmful to people, pets and the environment | Voluntarily dismissed without prejudice |
| Windex Vinegar
(May 2020 class-action lawsuit) |
Marketing product as non-toxic when window cleaner contains potentially harmful and toxic ingredients | Pending |
| Windex
(May 2020 class-action lawsuit) |
Marketing products as non-toxic when they contain ingredients harmful to people, pets and the environment | Pending |
| GreenPan cookware
(September 2019 class-action lawsuit) |
Claiming cookware is good for the environment when it is made of metal that does not biodegrade | Settled |
| Nestlé chocolate
(April 2019 class-action lawsuit) |
Marketing chocolate as sustainably sourced when company’s cocoa supply chain in West Africa has “virtually no environmental standards in place” | Dismissed without prejudice |
| Keurig Coffee Pods
(September 2018 class-action lawsuit) |
Marketing plastic single-serve coffee pods as recyclable when the pods cannot be recycled and end up in landfills because recycling facilities cannot separate the pods from the general waste due to their small size | Settled |
| Kirkland Signature cleaning products (May 2018 class-action lawsuit) | Marketing products as environmentally responsible, green, natural and non-toxic when they contain unnatural, harmful and toxic chemical ingredients | Voluntarily dismissed pursuant to settlement agreement |
| BMW X5 and 355d
(March 2018 class-action lawsuit) |
Using emissions-cheating software (so-called defeat devices) to deceptively advertise diesel vehicles as clean and environmentally friendly | Pending |
| BetterBrew Eco Coffee Pods
(2018 class-action lawsuit) |
Marketing coffee pods as 100% compostable, environmentally friendly and generating less waste when they are only compostable in commercial facilities that are generally unavailable | Remanded to state court |
| Ford F-250 and F-350
(Early 2018 class-action lawsuits) |
Using emissions-cheating software (so-called defeat devices) to deceptively advertise diesel vehicles as clean and environmentally friendly | Pending |
| Kauai coffee pods
(May 2017 NAD inquiry) |
Advertising coffee pods as 100% compostable while noting in the fine print that they’ve only been certified to decompose at “industrial facilities” | Company agreed to prominently disclose that coffee pods are not certified for backyard composting, per NAD’s recommendation |
| Chevrolet Cruze
(July 2016 class-action lawsuit) |
Using emissions-cheating software (so-called defeat devices) to deceptively advertise diesel vehicle as clean and environmentally friendly | Pending |
| LEI Eco Alkaline batteries
(March 2016 NAD inquiry) |
Claiming batteries are carbon neutral without providing information on when emissions reductions occurred or will occur | Referred to FTC |
| Mercedes-Benz BlueTEC
(Early 2016 class-action lawsuits) |
Using emissions-cheating software (so-called defeat devices) to deceptively advertise diesel vehicles as clean and environmentally friendly | Settled |
| Natural American Spirit cigarettes
(2016 class-action lawsuits) |
Marketing tobacco as earth friendly in connection with false claims that cigarettes are less harmful than regular cigarettes | Pending |
| Volkswagen and Audi
(Late 2015/2016 class-action lawsuits) |
Using emissions-cheating software (so-called defeat devices) to deceptively advertise diesel vehicles as clean and environmentally friendly | Pending (some claims settled) |
| Charmin Freshmates
(April 2015 class-action lawsuit) |
Marketing moist towelettes as flushable when the wipes are not suitable for flushing down a toilet | Settled |
| Rainforest Alliance
(April 2015 private lawsuit) |
Misrepresenting how earth friendly the products it certifies (such as Chiquita bananas) really are | Settled |
| SeaWorld
(Early 2015 class-action lawsuits) |
Representing that it creates a fun, interesting and stimulating environment for its killer whales when the captive animals lead “unhealthy and despairing lives” | Dismissed |
| Nature’s Own Green Label paper plates
(October 2013 FTC complaint) |
Marketing products as biodegradable, compostable and recyclable without competent and reliable scientific evidence in violation of an FTC consent order | Settled |
| Nest thermostats
(June 2013 NAD inquiry) |
Claiming other programmable thermostats waste energy (and thus are less eco-friendly) without sufficient evidence | Nest agreed to discontinue the claim, among others, as recommended by NAD |
* Additional brands accused of falsely marketing their sunscreens as “reef friendly” or having a “reef-conscious formula” include Hawaiian Tropic, Kroger, Alba Botanica and Up & Up.
** In June 2022, the Connecticut attorney general sued Reynolds Consumer Products alleging, among other things, that the company falsely and deceptively marketed Hefty recycling bags as recyclable despite knowing the bags were incompatible with recycling facilities in the state. In July 2022, another class-action lawsuit was filed over Hefty’s environmental claims.
*** Class-action lawsuits also allege that Tide pureclean detergent is falsely marketed as “plant based” when it contains ingredients that come from petroleum.
√ Additional brands sued for falsely marketing products as dolphin safe include Aldi, Bumble Bee, Chicken of the Sea, Fancy Feast and Starkist.
√√ Earth Rated is also facing class-action litigation for allegedly falsely marketing bags as compostable.
√√√ Chinet, Amazon, Kroger and Albertsons are also facing litigation alleging that bowls and plates are falsely marketed as compostable.
Find more of our coverage on greenwashing here.
You Might Be Interested In
Deceptive Marketing 101: Recyclable Claims
How products marketed as ‘recyclable’ end up in landfills.
How Causewashing Deceives Consumers
For decades, brands have been supporting causes — or rather pretending to support causes — to boost sales.