.jpg)
Chris Lischewski, Shue Wing Chan and In-Soo Cho -
Over the past few years, Greenpeace has launched numerous crusades targeting our companies for what we do — fish for tuna.
Each of its campaigns is more baffling than the one before. In their latest campaign against tuna, Greenpeace activists have dressed up as bloodthirsty sharks to ask why a company would kill Disney’s Nemo, and they’ve produced a video featuring one of our brand icons being stabbed in the eye.
This might be attention-grabbing. But it’s not exactly constructive dialogue and it isn’t intellectually serious.
No one comes away any more knowledgeable about tuna and sustainable fishing. Unfortunately, this attack on canned tuna isn’t about science.
It’s about fund raising, and Greenpeace has discovered a recipe for success: Target something that’s easily recognizable (like tuna), make some scary claims in the media, parade around in funny costumes — and start raking in the donations.
It’s a recipe that Greenpeace has perfected over the past two decades. But Greenpeace isn’t helping to conserve the world’s tuna stocks. In fact, the campaign against tuna fishing is doing just the opposite.
It has become a sideshow that is trying to sabotage a serious sustainability partnership between dedicated conservationists and the fishing community.
Greenpeace has rejected numerous offers to discuss the future of tuna fishing by joining the International Seafood Sustainability Foundation’s (ISSF) Environmental Stakeholder Committee.
This organization is made up of scientists, industry leaders and environmentalists who seek to undertake science-based initiatives for the long-term conservation and sustainable use of tuna stocks.
Posted via http://maritime-news.posterous.com Maritime-News posterous
No comments:
Post a Comment