Commentary: PRISM+ ad saga signals greater greenwashing accountability for Singapore companies

SINGAPORE: As the COP28 climate conference wrapped up in Dubai earlier this month, an interesting development on the sustainability front was unravelling back in Singapore.

For the first time, Singapore’s advertising standards watchdog spoke out against an advertisement for making misleading environmental claims about a product.

The ad in question was made by electronics retailer PRISM+ and featured social media influencer Xiaxue. It claimed that using PRISM+’s air-conditioner was the “best tip” to “save Earth”, and showed Xiaxue setting it to 23 degrees Celsius to help “save Earth”.

The self-regulatory Advertising Standards Authority of Singapore (ASAS) opined that the ad was “not acceptable” under the legally non-binding Singapore Code of Advertising Practice, which states that advertisements should not mislead through inaccuracy, exaggeration or other means.

PRISM+ maintained that the ad did not misrepresent the air-con’s energy-saving features, but took the video down from its Instagram account owing to its “healthy relationship with ASAS”.

I believe this ruling is a significant marker in the broader movement against greenwashing for its varying implications.

AN UNPRECEDENTED RULING

First, we have not seen a precedent ruling of this kind in Singapore, and perhaps Asia. This stems from the fact that there are hitherto very few complaints to the advertising watchdogs on greenwashing-related content, and Asian consumers may still be lacking adequate sustainability awareness.

According to ASAS, there had only been one greenwashing-related complaint besides the PRISM+ video, and that was found not to breach its guiding principles.

In other jurisdictions such as the UK, there are similar non-governmental self-regulators in the advertising industry, such as its Advertising Standards Authority (ASA). Unlike its Singapore counterpart, ASA has issued many rulings against advertisements that carried misleading or unsubstantiated environmental claims.

Parties found to have violated ASA advertising standards include financial institutions like HSBC, which ran an ad touting its environmentally beneficial work while omitting its fossil fuel financing involvement; airlines like Air France for making claims on travelling “better and sustainably”; as well as consumer brands like Oatly over the impact of its alternative dairy product.

ASA is also notably proactive in picking up such claims, often utilising artificial intelligence on the web to identify such marketing, while ASAS retroactively responds to feedback or reports to investigate potential breaches. The time may be ripe for Asian regulators and watchdogs to step up efforts in monitoring and flagging potential misstatements.