yes--and I enjoyed it, for the most part. But I still saw it as a marketing ploy, even if it may have been accidental or due to some nudging by advertising execs...they do indeed have some nifty ads (hooray for Graphic Design student jobs.) Sure, it's user friendly, but they still want you to buy their stuff.
It still stands that Patagonia is an gigantic corporation, and makes it difficult for any new innovations to arise in the outdoor market and turn a profit (enabling the creators to keep spinning out new ideas and not have to work at Wal-mart) unless they work FOR Patagonia.
But, if they didn't want you to buy their stuff- they wouldn't be in business. If they weren't in business- who would be? Who would be blazing the trail in environmental business thinking? And if it were someone else and they became just as successfull and expanded, wouldn't that be the same thing? Even in they do have a cornerstone on the outdoor gear market- isn't putting some of that towards things like a green distribution center a good way to use that power
( ... )
I do agree that the swelling of their profits allows them to reach more "John and Jane Q. Public" when it comes to environmental issues (lordy how I hate that word "issues.") If there's going to be anymore of a green-friendly turnover, part of it WILL be more people changing what they buy, but the best thing would be for people to consume less (which would crush our economy--so sad that the concept of self sustainable living is getting further and further away), and the town-callers on the subject of "Consume Less" are far and few between. It's too easy for Americans to believe that buying MORE of a green friendly product helps the environment MORE, or, even worse, that they're being helpful by pumping money into a company. People are dumb that way, I guess. That's like saying pumping money into a charity for South African orphans is on an even-keel with going there and teaching people about irrigation
( ... )
But it is true that if Americans won't consume less they should at least consume green. It's like saying if every family stopped using Clorox and used cleaning supplies from Seventh Generation- still consuming, but less harmful and from a company that cares and is trying to change. Not trying to change the idea of selling a product, but trying to change how companies look at their impact.
Reply
Reply
It still stands that Patagonia is an gigantic corporation, and makes it difficult for any new innovations to arise in the outdoor market and turn a profit (enabling the creators to keep spinning out new ideas and not have to work at Wal-mart) unless they work FOR Patagonia.
'is what I was thinking.
Also: Wooden Nickel. Soon.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment