Climate Counts: Shading opinion

An independent guide influences brand and company reputations.

The Site

Climate Counts, a US-based non-profit organisation, produces a shopping guide and scorecard that put brand and company reputations in the spotlight.

Climate Counts has a banner at the top of every page on its site linking to a download of its one-page ‘pocket shopping guide’. The guide, in PDF format, has ratings for 60 top companies across nine sectors that allow consumers “to see how serious companies are about stopping climate change – and how they compare with their sector competitors”. Ratings are based on an annual scorecard, all 60 of which are published in detail on the site and easily accessed.

Individual scorecards show the company’s major brands, an explicit statement of its advisability as a choice for “the climate-conscious consumer”, links to related articles (recent news stories), links to ready-addressed e-mails that allow consumers to echo Climate Counts’ judgement (good or bad) to the company and, at the foot of the page, links to various networking sites including diggit, del.icio.us, Facebook, Seed Newsvine, reddit and Stumble It as well as a Send to friend option.

The Takeaway

Climate Counts’ use of its site as a persuasive campaigning vehicle is a reminder to any company, and not just those featured in its shopping guide, that the web is a tool which can be used most effectively by others to shape its reputation. At one level the shopping guide is promoting responsible consumerism by providing data that helps buyers make a more informed purchasing decision. But Climate Counts’ real targets are the companies from which shoppers might be buying.

The guide itself is a variation on the standard name-and-shame pressure group tactic with an element of endorse-to-reinforce putting a less aggressive spin on the exercise. The scorecard in turn is equally if not more powerful, tapping into the traditional strengths of the web as a medium (for example, related links and online contact) but also newer viral ones such as the news-sharing sites and Facebook. Worth following suit, and linking to such a site if you come out well – the endorsement is all the more credible for being independent. But equally prudent and damage limiting to have some redress on your site, be it a direct response or your take on the issue.

First published on 08 May, 2008