Roxy Erickson

So refreshing. Human methods for a human problem. We often talk about WHAT we’re saying on climate. We spend far less time thinking about HOW we’re saying it. If the goal is real momentum, then methods matter. Tone matters. Messengers matter. We talk a lot about carbon data and policy. Less about tone and tactics. Yet as this post calls out, 40% of Brits want more climate content in what they watch. Over half would feel more positively about a character who shows concern for their children’s future. That says something. Data informs, but story connects. Facts tell, but humour travels. If we want traction, tactics matter. Great work Minnie Stephenson, Maeve Campbell and team for trying a different route. Very timely, quietly powerful.

4

You don’t need perfect data to get started and chasing perfection too early is often what stalls progress. Start small. Focus on what you can measure with confidence. Build systems that are simple, defensible and repeatable. What your customers are really looking for isn’t perfection. It is trust. Trust that your data is credible. Trust that you understand your impact. Trust that you’re making steady, transparent progress. That is what keeps you in the supply chain. #AASBS2 #Scope3 #CarbonAccounting #Sustainability

1

Thank you for sharing, Creatives for Climate! We’re really looking forward to gathering climate-ambitious organisations and sustainable procurement leaders in person in Oxford on March 16th to explore a question that’s becoming impossible to ignore: how can clients use their influence to ensure the services they procure accelerate (rather than undermine) their net-zero commitments? We know what it looks like when this doesn't come into the equation. Prince William recently faced backlash when hiring PR Firm LLYC Brasil to promote his Earthshot Prize. LLYC Brasil is currently under contract to state oil company Petrobas to help run comms in response to reputational crises. The tension is clear: can an initiative centred on climate leadership credibly partner with agencies simultaneously supporting major fossil fuel expansion? As Lucy put it so eloquently in this piece, “An initiative as influential as the Earthshot Prize could be sending the right signal and driving positive change by choosing suppliers that can deliver on its message with integrity, but it’s doing the opposite,” said Lucy von Sturmer, executive director of ad industry campaign group Creatives for Climate. “More than any other client or brand out there, this is a massive missed opportunity.” https://lnkd.in/eUUR7giM That logic extends beyond high-profile examples. Many brands are working hard to decarbonise their physical supply chains (which is great!). But if their communications, lobbying, or advisory partners are also advancing fossil fuel interests, it raises difficult questions about alignment and integrity. We are seeing courageous brands like Seventh Generation using the F List as an exclusion criteria for hiring creative agencies. What does this say? IT says: if you choose to work with the fossil fuel industry on PR and advertising campaigns, that is your decision. But you cannot simultaneously represent brands whose climate commitments would be undermined by that work. More on Clean Creatives work on creating guidance for other brands to do the same here: https://lnkd.in/e52YXh9h The workshop will explore all of these questions and how procurement can be such a powerful climate lever! Register your interest here https://lnkd.in/eGv6aikE. P.S. We’ll be continuing the conversation over lunch in one of Oxford’s gorgeous colleges afterwards, a small additional incentive if you’re on the fence about attending 😉 Siddharth Shekhar Yadav Clarissa Salmon Lucy von Sturmer

31