Shell’s Green Ad Survives ASA Scrutiny

Shell has again been through the Advertising Standards Agency’s (ASA) review process, following a greenwashing complaint regarding one of their LinkedIn video posts. Earlier this year, the ASA analysed one of Shell UK Ltd’s TV advertisements which, it was alleged, made misleading environmental claims. Both ASA rulings have fallen in Shell’s favour, potentially demonstrating a more lenient approach to green claims made by large energy companies. In particular, this latest decision is interesting in that it explores the nuances in advertising on professional social media platforms where businesses and individual consumers can view the same content.

The LinkedIn Advert

Shell’s paid-for LinkedIn advert used a video format, with imagery of the sun and solar energy, to showcase their partnership with Baker Hughes, an energy technology company. Accompanying on-screen text stated: “What connects the Italian sun with bright engineering ideas? Our work with Baker Hughes to help meet their energy needs and decarbonise operations. Discover more at shell.com/progresstogether. Progress together”. 

To provide context, a caption stated: “Discover the progress we’re making together with Baker Hughes to help reduce their emissions and decarbonise their operations in Italy. Progress happens together".

The Complaint and Response

The complainant challenged whether the ad gave a misleading impression of the overarching environmental impact of Shell’s business activities.

In response, Shell Energy explained that they only provide business-to-business (B2B) services, including a range of business energy solutions designed to help companies manage their energy needs and navigate the decarbonisation process. The ad showed Shell’s work with Baker Hughes to illustrate those services. 

Shell also emphasised that they utilised tag and interest-based tools to target at a subset of experienced senior individuals in relevant roles who used LinkedIn; a platform created for business and professional users. Overall, Shell concluded that the audience would be a sophisticated B2B audience who would understand the advert as well as its wider context.

The ASA’s Ruling

The ASA did not uphold the complaint, but they did consider that the methods used by Shell to target their intended audience were still relatively broad and, as such, the ad could still reach a mixed audience of businesses and consumers. Despite this, they emphasised that the ad featured the Shell Energy name and logo, and its content was focused on Shell Energy’s business energy solutions which are not available to general consumers. This, the ASA stated, “positioned the ad in a business context” and meant that it was a “business-to-business marketing communication”.

Furthermore, the ASA found that the ad, which was focused on Shell’s work with one client, meant that readers, “were unlikely to interpret the message as representative of Shell’s wider consumer-facing brand activity or as a comment on its own carbon transition plans”. 

Ultimately, the ASA found that the ad did not breach rules 3.1 and 11.1 (Environmental claims) of the CAP Code (Edition 12), given that the basis of the environmental claims was clear and the ad was unlikely to mislead.

Conclusion

This ruling demonstrates the ASA’s careful consideration of context when reviewing green advertising, particularly in relation to (as is the case here) targeted advertising within a business situation. However, if taken with the earlier decision which also fell in Shell’s favour, this could be indicative of a trend whereby the ASA are willing to take a more tolerant approach towards green claims made by energy companies.

By Francesca Gransden and Christopher Wenn

We therefore concluded that the basis of the environmental claims was clear and the ad was unlikely to mislead.

https://www.asa.org.uk/rulings/shell-energy-uk-a25-1288971-shell-energy-uk-ltd.html