Slashdot Mirror
Lego Ends Shell Partnership Under Greenpeace Pressure
jones_supa writes Since 1960s, we have been seeing the oil company Shell logo being featured in some Lego sets, and Legos being distributed at petrol stations in 26 countries. This marketing partnership is coming to an end, after coming under sustained pressure from Greenpeace. The environmental campaign, protesting about the oil giant's plans to drill in the Arctic, came with a YouTube video that depicted pristine Arctic, built from 120 kg of Lego, being covered in oil. CEO of Lego, Jørgen Vig Knudstorp, wants to leave the dispute between Greenpeace and Shell, and the toy company is getting out of the way.
Because Legos are made out of pixie dust, not oil.
How can they be "getting out of the way"? There are only two choices, a) stick with Shell and snub Greenpeace, or b) dump Shell and please Greenpeace. There is no middle ground where they can please both.
Beware of Sales Reps bearing gifts.
This just in: LEGO are made from refined petroleum products. OMFG NO. The horror.
...to religious bullying.
Tesla Supercharger stations from now on?
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
Please always refer to our products as “LEGO bricks or toys” and not “LEGOS.” By doing so, you will be helping to protect and preserve a brand of which we are very proud, and that stands for quality the world over”
they are as bad as PETA. Lego are children's toys, leave your goddamn petty politics out of them.
So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
I could go on, but I think you get the idea.
This post contains no rudeness or derision of any kind. All arguments are friendly. Terms and exclusions may apply.
greenpeace isn't all good either they're often misguided and destructive.
having shell logos on lego gas stations hardly seems that evil, if you are building a lego town you need a lego gas station, might as well be someones gas station
Just means Octan has an energy monopoly for all those LEGO cars, trucks and planes now
That's simply not true. Esso is an Exxon-Mobil brand. See http://corporate.exxonmobil.co... Shell refers to Royal Dutch Shell, an entirely different company...
For me, Greenpeace lost all credibility in the 1980's when one by one the founding scientist left in disgust, the last one left in the early 90's when Greenpeace were using a mountain of pseudo-science to attack the use of chlorine in drinking water (arguably the most effective public health measure of the 20th century). Basically the leadership was taken over by political types and they lost their scientific roots. However I am grateful for the fact they put an end to nuking pacific islands in my neighbourhood, and wish them the best of luck in their efforts to kill the coal industry before it kills us.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
What gets me is their opposition to GMO crops. I actually work in the field of crop improvement, and the stuff Greenpeace says and does put them right up there with anti-vaxxers in my opinion. They will protest biofortified or insect resistant crops in developing countries (just look at the Bt brinjal on Golden Rice controversies, both non-corporate by the way), then pat themselves in the back when the research gets blocked/destroyed, meanwhile farmers go back to spraying shitloads of pesticides and clearing more land to make up for the lost yields and children suffer malnutrition. They're just a bunch of scientifically illiterate book burning thugs using environmentalism to cover their naturalistic superstitions.
Don't forget Brent Spar: when they occupied the platform and took some measurements, it turned out Shell was actually right, so they fudged the numbers rather than admit their mistake. Greenpeace is not about the environment any more, even though many of its individual members and employees may still be. This often happens to such organisations: at some point it's no longer about the founders' goals, but about membership, money, and influence. Greenpeace is no exception: today they are a marketing firm with themselves as sole customer.
I am sure they will offer up some excuse about Shell greenwashing its image, or brainwashing our kids about the blessings of fossil fuels, but the stark truth is that this does nothing for the environment. This announcement comes in time for GP to further their real goals: they have been out of the news for a bit and they needed a win and some publicity. Well played.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
Speakers, not corporate lawyers, determine language use, even if corporations wish it were otherwise.
Perhaps it is time to show the top donors... well how about all their donor
People give money to Greenpeace because they know "all about them".
and then companies can start to decide if they want to employee people like that.
Not too big on freedom of speech, eh?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"