For years, Greenpeace activists have relied on a complicit press to parrot their half-baked sustainability rhetoric and cover their harebrained publicity stunts targeting tuna brands all over the globe and the retail customers who carry them.
But after bombarding retailers and the larger public with too many empty gimmicks — meaningless petitions, disturbing videos, nitwitted protests — and unsupported accounts of environmental “carnage” and “destruction,” Greenpeace has created a major problem for itself. Reporters, no longer willing to accept Greenpeace’s claims at face value, are starting to question the eco-activists’ motives, data and failure to contribute meaningful solutions.
Seafood News’ Editor and Publisher John Sackton is just the latest to criticize Greenpeace for promoting gross distortions about seafood sustainability. He writes:
“The statements from Greenpeace … show just how divorced from scientific reality they are. The people they are reaching are being deliberately misinformed. … More reputable sources, including the FAO and the scientific assessments of the International Seafood Sustainability Foundation, show that tuna is not overfished and overfishing is not occurring, except within the big-eye complex, where too many juvenile fish are being caught.”
But that’s not the only reason why Mr. Sackton disapproves of Greenpeace:
“Greenpeace is silent on the steps industry is taking to address the problem – such as eliminating nets from FADs which reduces shark bycatch by 90%. If they admitted things can change, their audience would lose interest. In the same way, few conservation groups can acknowledge the tremendous success that U.S. fisheries management has had, because to do so diminishes their role as outside critics.”
Mr. Sackton also notes that Greenpeace’s annual retailer rankings report is pointless:
“The report evaluates retailers mostly on how they interact with Greenpeace, including removing fish Greenpeace asks them not to sell.”
In short, Mr. Sackton has dug a little deeper and sees the true Greenpeace: fringe, unserious and desperate. It’s just a matter of time before other reporters hold Greenpeace accountable for using them to spread sustainability tall tales.
