6 tips to survive a misinformation campaign
What can you do when activists with questionable tactics target your brand? Here's how to weather the attacks. Read More

Over the last 20-plus years — from my work as a registered professional biologist in the forests of British Columbia to the last decade developing and scaling business sustainability strategies for large corporations — my career has coalesced around one core concept: business sustainability.
It’s the idea that free markets, business and their supply chains can be a powerful tools for creating enhanced social and environmental outcomes in concert with economic value.
I call it “pragmatic environmentalism,” the essence of which is this: Given the social and economic frameworks and institutions of our society, more social and environmental good can be accomplished (and faster) by working with business in a manner relevant and true to their reason for being — the creation of shareholder value — than by leading with an argument that it is “the right thing to do.”
Don’t get me wrong. My environmental education and work as a conservation biologist tell me that it is “the right thing to do”; however, my business education and my experience as an executive brings out the pragmatist in me. The right thing to do is more appealing to a business when approached in a manner that also makes economic sense.
Time is of the essence; while working towards it, we cannot wait for “Capitalism 2.0.” To create material social and environmental value, we must frame and manage sustainability as an economic opportunity. In short, we must harness the power of our business models and supply chains to generate environmental and social value.
Pragmatic environmentalism builds upon the traditional corporate social responsibility mindset of what one is “responsible for” and uses sustainability as a strategic framework to examine how social and environmental issues and mega-trends — such as climate change, population growth and the ever-increasing demand for resources such as food, fiber and fuel — may affect business performance and the economic, social and environmental context of one’s stakeholders.
Not surprisingly, ethical stakeholder engagement is a core concept of business sustainability. Armed with a strategic mindset and an innovation agenda, business sustainability challenges managers need to understand the economic, social and environmental context of the stakeholders throughout their extended supply chains, including those of one’s suppliers and their suppliers.
Specifically, one must strive to understand the relationships among one’s business activities, extended supply chains and the process of economic, environmental and social value creation (or erosion). This, and the process of exploring, understanding and balancing economic, environmental and social value creation is the foundation of virtually every sustainably-driven innovation strategy.
Unethical stakeholders
But what’s a business to do when self-declared stakeholders crash a corporation’s sustainability initiatives and use unethical tactics to promote their agenda? That’s a good question; unfortunately, it’s one that has been around for decades and is increasingly relevant.
Perhaps more than any other industry, those managing the sustainability of forest product supply chains feel they long have had to deal with unethical stakeholders. This came to a head in May when the mayors of 22 communities in Northern Ontario and Quebec held a press conference at Parliament Hill, and a series of meetings with federal ministries to address misinformation campaigns and coercive tactics on the sustainability of the rural communities that depend on the sustainable, forest-based supply chains of Canada’s boreal forest.
These communities framed the issue as the “threat of eco-terrorism” from groups such as Greenpeace and ForestEthics on their “way of life.” And, while “eco-terrorism” is too extreme of a label, I spoke with forest workers and mayors. Unfortunately, the label reflects how they say they feel — like victims, collateral damage of deliberately inaccurate misinformation campaigns from organizations whose private politics have no regard for balancing the economic, social and environmental sustainability of their northern communities.
For example, activists have labeled Canada’s boreal forest an “endangered forest” — a meaningless term without any scientific criteria or merit. They have attacked product and retail brand-owners that source paper from forest products companies that operate there — urging brand-owners to change their sourcing relationships or face escalating Internet and social marketing campaigns labeling them as “destroyers of forests,” picketing their stores and harassing their customers.
Such behavior — particularly when designed to circumvent democratic public processes and land-use planning — is an abuse of the public trust, particularly when such planning has the support of local aboriginal peoples, academics, professional biologists and foresters, communities and government.
This raises the question of who should be considered a stakeholder and by what criteria. It’s another good question with no easy answer; however, to be a valid stakeholder, a person or organization should be required to conduct themselves in an honorable and ethical manner and abide by the rule of law.
Mitigating misinformation
Unfortunately, many companies do not apply such criteria when faced with aggressive, self-declared “stakeholders,” leaving them exposed to significant brand-risk. If your company does not already have criteria for identifying valid stakeholders, consider ethical behavior a minimal requirement.
As a sustainability professional, I too have had the unfortunate experience of having to mitigate misinformation campaigns and questionable tactics of activist groups, consuming resources that would be better served pursuing the corporation’s social purpose with legitimate stakeholders. Deceptive campaigns designed to erode a business’s reputation and subvert their commercial operations and trade relationships is neither honorable nor ethical conduct, nor in accordance with the rule of law.
Faced with such tactics, many brand owners cave to activist demands, hoping they’ll move on. But these campaigns are not victimless; they actually erode economic, social and environmental value in your supply chains and, as in this example, threaten the viability of hundreds of communities.
Let’s consider what to do if campaigners have targeted your brand. Unfortunately, caving to unethical tactics is merely the beginning of your “relationship.” Demands will escalate and your brand increasingly will be framed as a collaborator when activists declare a “victory” and use your brand in subsequent campaigns against the next brand-owner. (Not the best company to keep.)
Six survival tips
My advice to product and retail brand-owners trying to manage misinformation campaigns is this:
1. Understand that you are not the target; rather, your brand, fabricated controversy and the creation of brand-risk are merely the tools of an organization trying to promote its politics. You are being used; don’t take it personally.
2. Understand that “environmental” campaign groups are not organizations with any scientific standing, nor do they further business sustainability in any sense of the concept; rather, they are political activist organizations.
3. If you do not have in-house sustainability expertise, engage a business sustainability professional who is familiar with the issues and who can help you identify ethical, conservation science or other social-purpose organizations that truly can partner with your company to explore environmental and social issues that will affect your business.
4. Use your “Ethical Code of Business Conduct” as a touchstone for identifying legitimate stakeholders; hold “environmental” groups to the same standard as your other business relationships — if they don’t operate within your ethical framework, move on.
5. If you have not already done so, begin your sustainability journey, because there is no shortage of legitimate environmental and social issues that will affect your business and no shortage of legitimate environmental and social-purpose organizations to help you understand them.
6. Understand that done right, business sustainability is a gateway to becoming an even better company, a more profitable business with less risk and a workforce that will appreciate the opportunity to participate and succeed in one of the greatest entrepreneurial imperatives of our time — the creation of business value from social and environmental leadership.
