-1-1.png?height=120&name=Curation%20Logo%20Transparent%20(1)-1-1.png)
The UK's Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has ruled that a video ad from oil giant TotalEnergies SE misled the public by exaggerating the company’s investment in renewable energy without disclosing the full extent of its continued reliance on oil and gas. The ad, which featured a clean energy startup supported by the company, failed to mention that fossil fuels still dominate TotalEnergies' operations. In contrast, a separate Shell ad, which included references to both its renewable initiatives and its core oil and gas business, was deemed acceptable. The ASA highlighted the importance of providing a balanced view when making environmental claims to avoid “misleading by omission”. (Bloomberg)
Why does this matter? This ruling is important because it sets a clearer standard for how fossil fuel companies can advertise their green initiatives without misleading consumers. As public awareness of climate issues grows, so does the scrutiny of corporate environmental claims – especially from high-emission industries. The ASA’s decision signals that regulators expect full transparency from companies trying to position themselves as environmentally responsible. It also raises broader questions about corporate accountability and whether industries with fundamentally high carbon footprints should be allowed to advertise green credentials at all, echoing debates similar to those that led to tobacco advertising bans.
For Rio Tinto, the crackdown on greenwashing is highly relevant as it highlights the necessity of transparent and credible environmental claims. As a major player in the mining industry, Rio Tinto must ensure that its sustainability communications, including its climate goals and green initiatives, are substantiated by verifiable actions and data.
Enforcement is escalating beyond fossil fuel advertising. Earlier this month, German prosecutors fined Deutsche Bank-owned asset manager DWS €25m ($27m) for overstating its ESG credentials. Investigations revealed that from 2020 to 2023, DWS promoted itself as a leader in sustainable investing, however prosecutors found these claims “did not correspond to reality”. This case reinforces that greenwashing is no longer merely a reputational risk – it is now a material compliance and financial liability.
Among the actors leading a legal crackdown on greenwashing, is Germany’s Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH). The NGO is targeting over 100 companies for misleading environmental claims. From airlines to cosmetics, DUH legally challenges vague labels such as “climate neutral” that often rely on unverifiable carbon offsets or lack proper explanation. Backed by supportive court rulings, DUH’s work is reshaping how companies advertise sustainability, holding them accountable under Germany’s Act against Unfair Competition. Its efforts are sending a strong signal across Europe that climate claims must be transparent, specific and provable. As green marketing becomes more common, DUH’s activism is proving essential in protecting consumers and climate integrity alike.
Even certification bodies are tightening standards. The B Corp movement, which certifies ethical businesses, is undergoing a major overhaul amid growing criticism that it has enabled greenwashing. As major corporations with questionable environmental records joined its ranks, concerns mounted that the certification served more as marketing than meaningful accountability. The new standards, set for 2026, introduce minimum requirements across key areas such as climate action and human rights, replacing the loophole-laden points system. These changes aim to restore trust and prevent companies from masking harmful practices behind selective sustainability claims. This marks a broader shift toward measurable, defensible ESG performance across industries.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-025-04831-x
A recent study confirms that China’s Environmental Tax Law (ETL), introduced in 2018, plays a significant role in curbing corporate greenwashing—especially among heavily polluting firms. By increasing the cost of emissions, ETL pressures companies to adopt genuine environmental practices rather than misleading ESG claims. Crucially, the research highlights the powerful moderating effect of digitalization, with government-led digital systems proving most effective in enforcing transparency and accountability. Company and societal digital tools also aid in reducing greenwashing by boosting information accuracy and public scrutiny. Together, environmental taxation and digital oversight form a compelling strategy to ensure credible corporate sustainability.
https://www.thecooldown.com/green-business/coca-cola-greenwashing-sustainable/
https://trellis.net/article/adidas-greenwashing-lawsuit-warning-climate-claims/
A German court recently ruled that Adidas engaged in greenwashing by promoting its “climate neutrality by 2050” goal without clearly explaining how it would be achieved. While no fine was issued, the judgment serves as a warning to companies relying on vague climate language. The case highlights growing legal scrutiny of corporate sustainability claims, especially as regulators in the EU and U.S. push for transparency. Experts caution against “aspirational” or exaggerated green statements, urging businesses to back up environmental targets with detailed, science-based plans—or risk public backlash, legal action and damaged trust with increasingly eco-conscious consumers.
The path forward is not greenhushing—staying silent to avoid risk—but clear, evidence-based communication grounded in science and supported by third-party validation where possible. Sustainability is no longer just a brand value; it's a compliance and trust imperative.