This section includes info on new boycotts, successes and updates about ongoing campaigns from the current issue of Ethical Consumer.
Boycott News Archive (from May 2006)
Ethical Consumer calls for boycott of climate
criminals
With climate change climbing the political agenda, some corporations
are still funding campaigns to confuse the public and policy makers.
To coincide with Live Earth we called for a boycott of three of the
worst climate criminals.
Esso petrol
Exxon-Mobil, the company behind Esso, is the only major oil company
still funding groups that wrongly claim the causes of global warming
are still uncertain. The company also fails to invest anything in renewable
energy technologies. Exxon has donated millions to climate change denying
think tanks the International Policy Network and the Centre for the
New Europe. See issue 105 for our petrol companies report.
Nouvelle recycled toilet paper
You might be surprised to see a recycled toilet tissue brand in the
list. But the company that owns it also makes toilet tissue from virgin
forests, was the main US importer of wood from Indonesia and came bottom
in a recent
World Wildlife Fund comparison of toilet tissue companies. Brand
owners Koch Industries, has been part of a team advising Bush on “conservative
environmentalism,” or in short, deregulation. This agenda led to
Bush statements that logging was good for forests and that dams were
good for salmon. See
our toilet roll report in issue 107 for alternatives.
Miller lager
Altria (previously Philip Morris) has also funded groups which claim
that global warming is a "myth" or “uneconomic”
to address. Altria has a substantial shareholding in SABMiller, which
also owns Appletiser, Peroni Nastro Azzuro and Pilsner Urquell.
For alternative mainstream brands, the highest ethiscores go to Budvar
(13.5) and Grolsch (12.5).
Tell the climate criminals why you’re supporting Ethical Consumer’s boycott by email - Esso: citizenship@exxonmobil.com - Miller (Altria): PMI.pressoffice@pmintl.com - Nouvelle (Koch Industries): comments@kochind.com
Kraft Foods splits from Altria
In a victory for campaign groups Kraft Foods has split from parent company
Altria. The move was originally proposed by the Interfaith Centre on
Corporate Responsibility and was supported by a substantial number of
Kraft shareholders. Altria is subject to a boycott call from Ethical
Consumer’s Boycott Bush campaign. The consumer campaign to
boycott Bush’s biggest funders was set up in 2001 following Bush’s
rejection of the Kyoto Agreement. Altria has been President Bush’s
most generous donor. Kraft brands such as Toblerone, Dairylea, Philadelphia
and Kenco are now off the boycott list.
Proctor and Gamble
Proctor and Gamble (P&G) has been the subject of a long running
boycott call from the Uncaged
Campaign due to the corporation’s massive use of animal testing.
In 2001 Uncaged hit the headlines after exposing horrific accounts
of cats and dogs killed in experiments for pet food subsidiary IAMS/Eukanuba.
P&G tests on animals in order to get new chemical ingredients
onto the market. Novel ingredients enable the marketing claims of
“new” and “improved” cosmetic and cleaning products.
According to the Uncaged Campaign, despite P&G's claims to being
committed to eliminating animal experiments ("We wish we could
totally eliminate animal testing today but we cannot..."):
P&G’s brands include household names such as Ariel, Daz, Camay, Fairy, Gillette, Max Factor, Olay, Pantene Pro-V, Pringles, Herbal Essences and Head & Shoulders.
This May saw the largest ever global Boycott P&G Day, with 45 events in cities from Sydney to Stockholm. In the UK alone, over a quarter of a million people have signed a pledge to boycott P&G.
For a full list of P&G’s brands, campaign resources and how to get involved see the Boycott P&G website or contact Uncaged Campaigns, 9 Bailey Lane, Sheffield S1 4EG, United Kingdom Tel: 0114 272 2220
Ethical Consumer gives a ‘Best Rating’ for animal testing
policy to companies that operate a “fixed cut-off date”.
This means not using any ingredients tested on animals after a fixed
date. Every company that applies a “fixed cut off date”
policy reduces the market for ingredients that continue to be tested
on animals.
