Greenpeace thinks it can call the shots by issuing rankings, and unfortunately, the media lets it get away with nonsense. CBC News (Canada) called out 5 brands that “remained near the bottom of Greenpeace’s list because … they use tuna caught by fishing methods that Greenpeace Canada considers destructive…”

See it? Greenpeace’s list. Greenpeace’s rules. Greenpeace ranks. And Greenpeace spanks.

At least one of the brands “near the bottom” never completed the Greenpeace survey. Did that stop Greenpeace from ranking the brand? Of course not. Greenpeace’s “evaluation” of any brand (or grocery chain or electronics company) is completely subjective, with or without data.

Greenpeace reports, “Pastene did not respond to Greenpeace’s survey this year and continues to skirt any discussion on the sustainability of its tuna. The company’s lack of transparency should raise a red flag…” Such audacity coming from an organization that itself won’t reveal the criteria by which it judges each participating (or not participating) canned tuna brand or the scientific methodology of its survey instrument to give it a modicum of validity. Then again, Greenpeace wears its hypocrisy on its sleeve.

Greenpeace continues to demonstrate that it lacks the credibility necessary to be taken seriously. It judges companies’ sustainability efforts but won’t actually commit to partaking in serious dialogue on the issues at hand. It purports to work with tuna companies and sustainability advocates, yet it repeatedly refuses to collaborate with committed conservationists, marine environmentalists, governments, scientists and others under the umbrella of the International Seafood Sustainability Foundation. Instead of ranking companies and pulling media stunts, it should join the ranks of dedicated stakeholders working towards long-lasting solutions.

We applaud Pastene and every other brand, company or store that refuses to acknowledge Greenpeace’s legitimacy to issue non-science based ultimatums.