Much of our daily life is deeply embedded in an economy obsessed with growth and compulsive consumerism. In our capitalist system, a drop in Apple’s value sees ripples across the financial sector. 

Many of the reactions to my recent piece about the superficiality of green consumerism comprised a staunch defence of the possibilities of corporate environmentalism and for consumer choices to have the power to halt climate change. Some even argued that environmentalists should drop any anti-capitalist argument to appeal to a wider audience.

There are some fundamental contradictions inherent in creating a sustainable version of a system that values financial growth above everything else. But supporters of green consumerism overlook something else: the overwhelming grip of marketing, which stifles any glimmer of consumer power.

Psychological manipulation

Marketing is big business. For most companies their success will rest on the strength of their marketing rather than the product itself. Coca Cola – a globally established brand whose products have been largely unchanged for decades – still spends roughly four billion dollars a year on advertising.

Part of the reason for these substantial investments is the psychological analysis that goes into making consumers feel they need to shop, as well as creating a specific, recognisable brand which becomes almost like a close household friend. 

Advertisers feed on our susceptibility to make content that manipulates our emotions. In a study by the University of Southern California, 31 percent of the adverts that performed well appealed to people on an emotional level.

Marketing expert Martin Lindstrom argues that fear overrides all other emotions. Our sense of fear is most clearly targeted by insurance companies or other products which directly affect our sense of security. Our response to fear is also fooling us into unnecessary purchases – banner adverts, relentless sale seasons and other marketing techniques create a false sense of urgency that further plays on fear. 

These marketing tricks were often used to appeal not only to our impulsiveness, but also our self-destructive behaviour, as outlined in Vance Packard’s influential book The Hidden Persuaders. 

Planned obsolescence

While in the fifties these behaviours were used to entice consumers to addictive substances such as cigarettes, they are now used to continue the global destruction of our planet. The urgency created by advertisers overrides that of climate scientists.

In the early years of the twentieth century consumer culture was born and encouraged, with New York retailers telling shoppers to ‘Buy what you need now!’ Not much has changed 100 years later, and a buy now, throwaway later mindset has been firmly entrenched and continually spurred on. 

One of the most troubling offenders are those technology giants such as Apple. E-waste is a monumental issue, around 20 million tons of e-waste are generated globally every year and only 40 percent of this is recycled.

Although Apple have made some admirable steps towards reducing their carbon footprint and environmental impact there is still a long way to go. The most considerable issue they have left to surmount is their encouragement of constant consumption of their products.

Planned obsolescence has been built into Apple’s marketing strategy, creating dedicated customers who will rush to grab the newest upgrade every year.

Coercive advertising 

This is of course not an approach unique to Apple. Technology companies pump out new phones, tablets, smart TVs, smart watches and other “innovative” products continuously.

It is notable that technology adverts are often only shown for a comparatively short time which furthers the image of them as fleetingly trendy, throwaway objects. Mobile networks further encourage a mindset of necessary renewal by encouraging users to upgrade their devices.

It is not unusual for users who resist the urge to comply to find themselves offered a new software “update” which actually begins to slow down their device. 

There is no reason that these devices can’t be made to last for years longer than they currently do. The decision to force and coerce us into upgrades is one consciously made by the companies which undermines any attempt at sustainability and instead favours sustained growth at the expense of the environment.

These companies will not stunt their profits for the benefit of the natural world. Rather than bowing to any consumer demands they will instead convince us to continue shopping and replacing.

Alternative systems

If we want to save the planet we need to move to a system based on common ownership, repair, reuse and recycling as much as we can. But these concepts run counter to the ethos of a company which sold 217.73 million iPhones last year and whose products are notoriously closed to the owner being able to make any fixes to the hardware or software themselves.

Environmentalists cannot kid themselves that climate change can be stopped dramatically or quickly enough (or possibly at all) within capitalism and through consumer demands.

Pervasive marketing coupled with constant production mean that any efforts are effectively neutered.

We must consider alternatives which have started to become more widely advocated by influential commentators, such as George Monbiot in his recent book Out of the Wreckage. The system we currently endure is not the end, a fairer and greener future is possible.

This Author 

Liz Lee Reynolds is a freelance writer focussing on place and the environment. She tweets @LizzieeLR. 

Image: Diariocritico de Venezuela, Flickr.