Greenpeace No Fan of Super Mario

As public concern over the environmental practices of large companies has risen, ratings offered by environmental groups have grown in importance. Of all these ratings systems, perhaps the one that has gotten the most press over the years is Greenpeace’s Guide to Greener Electronics.

 The decades-old environmental group released its yearly ranking again today, and this time it was console gaming giant Nintendo that ended up at the bottom of the heap. Quoting directly from the report: “Nintendo comes in last in 18th place with a pitiful 0.8 points out of 10, scoring zero on all e-waste criteria”—ouch. While I appreciate the fact that the report includes some of the world’s largest electronics manufacturers, delineates and explains its ranking criteria carefully,  I am little suspicious that the scoring isn’t entirely objective.  

For instance, when Apple got slammed by Greenpeace in 2006, the company was riding peaks of popularity it hadn’t seen in decades, thanks to brisk iPod sales and a hip, fresh image.  Apple immediately responded and improved its practices, which is good, but later it was revealed that Greenpeace may have—how shall I put this?—bent the truth just a touch in (initially) placing the trendy, media-savy computer company at the bottom of its rankings.

 Two years later, Ninetendo is still riding high on the unprecedented success of its its Wii console, even drawing praise for the system’s ability to get people active. I’m slightly incredulous that, once again, a company that’s been drawing a lot of media praise would find itself at the bottom of the heap. I also suspect it’s no accident that Microsoft finds itself towards the back of the pack, with the attention given to Bill Gates’ retirement and philanthropic efforts.

While I’d like to have a “green ends justify the means” mindset about this, I feel like over-zealousness in accusing companies of being environmentally unfriendly only undermines the soundness of the science that underlies the report. While few would expect Greenpeace, with it’s reputation for direct action and vigor, to be a completely objective observer, it’s still important to keep your facts verifiable and more or less immune to critcism—especially when you’re taking on large and powerful companies.

That having been said, the report does keep large electronics companies honest, and delivers some complicated production information at a level the general public can understand. Because a good deal of the products involved are manufactured half a world away from the people intended to buy them, it can be all too easy to sweep any less-than-desireable effects of production under the rug.