Ignore the idiotic New York Times headline "A World Consumed by Guilt" that has absolutely no relevance to this excellent article about the ins and outs of so-called green clothing; Writer Eric Wilson notes accurately that "No matter how sincere fashion designers may be in their efforts to embrace the green movement this season, consumers may find themselves perplexed by how to gauge the environmental impact of the many products that claim to be eco-friendly."
He talks to all the right people, including Chris Van Dyke, chief executive of Nau, who discusses the provenance of green clothing: ""When you only look at the raw materials to ask if something is really green, you are like the blind person holding the tail of the elephant. There's a whole lot of other factors you need to assess."
He finds also that purchasers are getting a little more savvy and demanding some kind of certification, rather than just calling it green:
More than half of the 2,007 respondents in a shopper survey in September by BBMG, a branding agency, said they were looking for certification seals on green claims to feel confident about their purchases.
"It is no longer O.K. to slap a green label on something and think that is acceptable to consumers," said Raphael Bemporad, a partner in the agency. "If you just put an eco-friendly phrase on something, you are risking a backlash from more savvy consumers."
So why such an idiotic headline implying that people only buy eco-clothing out of guilt? Perhaps they buy them because they are nicely designed and it is a healthy, positive thing to care about the environment? Eric Wilson, you need a new headline writer. ::New York Times