👋 Hey there, this is one of my more serious posts where you get something I hope you find interesting about product management, tech, or climate change, sign up😊.

Communication about climate change started with the scientists who noticed the problem in the first place. As a result the first, and what has become the base, of communication about climate change is technical, and not-designed for ‘normal’ people. Radley Yeldar put together 10 principles based on research from 10 Forbes 500 companies and leading sustainability brands on how to communicate about sustainability more effectively. These are the tips:

1. Put your audience first 
2. Bring in diverse voices and opinions 
3. Get specific 
4. Frame it right 
5. Avoid the s-word 
6. Explain the why 
7. Make it personal 
8. Be honest 
9. Make the future tangible
10. Say it your way

And now I’ll summarise their findings:

Put your audience first

‘With our corporate content we take an insight-led approach – crafting our stories in the language and format our audiences love and delivering them through the channels in which they play. It’s all about finding that sweet spot between what we want to say and what our audiences want to hear and see.’ - Madeleine Lewis, Unilever

• Calibrate jargon to your audience, erroring on the side of an unfamiliar audience
• Consider what the world wants to hear from you, not what you want to tell the world. 

Bring in diverse voices and opinions 

‘There isn’t one public. People have many different experiences – how can you appeal to their specific experiences?’ - Dr Sam Illingworth

• Bring in diverse voices and opinions to take sustainability out of its ivory tower.
• The broader the voices and opinions you incorporate, the more types of audiences you can appeal to. Hire untraditional copywriters, source stories from a wide net, and involve employees across different departments in your process. 

Get specific 

‘When you talk about sustainability generally, many don’t understand the underlying complexity and nuances – but when you actually speak with them about specific topics and make it concrete, people are often very knowledgeable and engaged.’ - Moritz Sckaer, Stakeholder reporter

• Don’t just say “this t-shirt is sustainable”. Specify if it’s made from 100% organic cotton, recycled polyester, or hemp. Then clarify why these attributes make it sustainable.

Frame it right 

• There’s evidence that positively framed communications can motivate people to engage in sustainability issues, but also risk lulling people into a false sense of security and achieving the opposite. Similarly you don’t want to run the risk of scaremongering.
• Does your audience have a low concern for the environment? Then a negatively-framed message may be the right choice. Do you need your audience to take action? Then a message framed by tangible gains for the individual may be most effective.

Avoid the s-word 

• Research shows that the most ‘sustainable’ brands almost never use the word ‘sustainable’. They know ‘sustainability’ alone isn’t enough to convince audiences. It’s time the rest of us did too
• Making the most sustainable choice can run counter to priorities (e.g. when organic food is so expensive it’s not worth the price). The choice that’s most personally beneficial wins. But sustainability doesn’t have to be a source of tension. Think about how Tesla is an exclusive futuristic brand first, electric car second. By normalising sustainability, you break the silo sustainability finds itself in. Most people may be concerned about sustainability issues, but don’t identify the word to their own lives.

Explain the why 

• For example, if you’re doing something sustainability related, ask yourself, did an initiative come to life because of an employee? Because customers were demanding it? Or because of a new regulation? This adds a human element that makes communications more trustworthy. 

Make it personal 

‘Different stories will motivate different kinds of people. We need an equally wide range of stories. The positive ones tend to get forgotten and these also need to be told, with hopeful and positive depictions of what the future could look like.’ - Dr Arran Stibbe

• Telling the human stories behind sustainability efforts bridges the gap, making communications more authentic. Reflect the diversity of your organisation and audiences by publishing stories from a range of perspectives. Unique tones and voices speak to audiences in ways a corporate brand can’t..

Be honest 

• Sustainability is often used to shroud gaps and insecurities in communications. Brands fear criticism if they reveal too much or are too honest. But painting an overly positive story leaves doubts and builds distrust. Address challenges and admit faults – doing so helps to create transparency and trust in your brand. None of us are perfect. 

Make the future tangible

“We need to take the upper hand and show the reality of where we need to get to in a way that’s fun and entertaining.” - Julia Giannini, ITV

• The only real images we have of our future are laden with resource-scarcity, natural disasters, and despair for humanity, yet negative frames are for the most part detrimental. Painting a clear picture of what your brand is working towards can motivate audiences to take part. Because right now, the “better future” we are all picturing is just “slightly less apocalyptic”.

Say it your way

• Research shows that even the world’s most reputable and resourced brands default to Stock Sustainability. The most effective brands are those that stick to their unique personality no matter the topic, channel, or audience. Remove as many clichés as possible. Then, show your writing to someone who hasn’t read it and remove your brand name – are they able to guess your brand, or at least your industry, based on what you’ve written? 

Problems

Jargon: Technical or language that requires expertise is over used

Too macro: ‘We have until 2030 to save the planet’. This kind of message is neither unique, nor informative. It says nothing about what you're actually doing about the issue. Although tempting to reel in your audience with a grandiose systemic truth about the issue at hand, it’s just not relatable enough to resonate. 

Overused language: If everyone defaults to the same language, words get overused and lose their meaning. The word ‘sustainability’ is an example. ‘Sustainability doesn’t mean anything to anyone anymore’ - Julia Giannini . More cynical experts say ‘sustainability’ “has been commandeered by industry, and they

simply add it as an adjective to any new project in order to greenwash”.  The mix-and-matched soup of overused sustainability buzzwords only makes it worse. 

Stock sustainability: Leaves, lightbulbs, dated corporate graphics, endless icons, and off-tone illustrations. The same problem with how sustainability is written, Verbal Stock Sustainability is a mix of science, corporate ‘business speak’ and strings of unconvincing vague sentiments like “we care”, “for the future”, and “together for change”.

Some Stock Sustainability comes from fear. Brands are afraid of being called out. So, they veil their messages in a corporate façade. Ironically, these overly sterile words often come across as dishonest and leave audiences even more sceptical of what the words hide. Even when they aren’t dishonest, Stock Sustainability language doesn’t appeal to the ‘greenest’ audience. 

The clichés

1. Our commitment

   1. We are committed

2. The future 

   1. Future generations 

   2. Sustainable future 

   3. Better tomorrow 

3. The planet

   1. Protect the planet 

   2. Help the planet 

   3. People and the planet 

4. Biggest challenge 

   1. World’s biggest challenge 

   2. Urgent issue 

   3. Unlike any other we’ve faced 

   4. Of the 21st century 

5. Our journey 

   1. Climate journey 

   2. Sustainability journey

6. Together, we can 

   1. In this together 

   2. Work together 

   3. Together, we can 

7. Building a better 

   1. Creating 

   2. Shaping 

8. Good for business 

   1. Win all round 

   2. Improves business

Why is this a problem? 

‘Stock Sustainability’ reduces action on sustainability issues. There’s plenty of evidence that this kind of language doesn’t engage people. So, any campaign or communication that aims to persuade people to act, or even to take an interest, is undermined by it.

We also know that sustainability is an ‘other’ for many people. While they might believe in climate change, the challenges of sustainability just don't feel relevant to day-to-day lives, which reduces willingness to take action. 

How did this happen? 

‘The reason why we’re here is because academics and scientists were communicating when they’re not communicators. Carbon dioxide levels, degrees of warming and environmental concepts are not going to motivate behavioural change. You need the comms and marketing experts in the room, who know how to frame messages that cut through, that are easy to understand, and allow people to act.’ - Julia Giannini 

As a result, sustainability messaging became siloed, separate to other issues, where other issues would see something like diesel prices increasing as bad sustainability communication would say it’s good. 

And it’s poorly framed, glass half empty rather than half full but even if you go hard the other way, research suggests neither are quite right.

Outro

This was all more or less ripped from the report I referenced in the beginning but was good reading and I hope good learning for me anyway. I hope it was at least interesting for you too if you’ve read this far.