More ESG “offsetting” nonsense - no paying off your victims (or worse, some priest) doesn’t make the harm you’ve done go away - sorry Apple - and Shell.
Todays signal is a double bill - Apple playing the ESG indulgence game and bragging about it to a goddess- and Shell shrugging and opting out, admitting its own uselessness in these vanity accounting games (but not offering much alternative).
Do utilitarian games work? Can you buy salvation? Or pay nominal money to offset real harms?
Does Apple’s pseudo-religious advert impress you?
Does Shell admitting it’s offsets are junk science help or hurt our shared future?
How can we demand real harm reduction instead of nominal accounting neutrality where we pretend one right undoes an unreeled wrong?
Was it a mistake to expect corporations and ceos not to game CSI and ESG for profit and PR / propoganda purposes? - wasn’t separation of church, brand and state actually a good thing?
Have markets for bads ever done any good?
Let me know!
Read more:
Indulgences, indulgences, everywhere, indulgences