This web page was created programmatically, to learn the article in its unique location you’ll be able to go to the hyperlink bellow:
https://www.edo.org.au/2025/09/02/alcoas-misleading-forest-rehabilitation-claims-breached-advertising-standards/
and if you wish to take away this text from our website please contact us
Aluminium large Alcoa misled the general public by a sequence of commercials earlier this 12 months that claimed it had rehabilitated forests it destroyed for bauxite mining, the promoting requirements regulator has discovered.
Ad Standards Australia concluded:
“…the general impression created by the commercial was inaccurate and more likely to mislead or deceive goal customers.
“… the Panel considered that the overall impression of the ad that rehabilitation had been completed to a point where the area would constitute a forest was not supported by evidence provided by the advertiser.” [Full report]
Alcoa has cleared greater than 28,000ha of forests in Western Australia for mining and related works and has utilized for approval to clear an additional 11,500ha, together with important sections of northern jarrah forest.
In August, EDO lodged complaints with Ad Standards Australia and the Australian Securities & Investments Commission (ASIC) on behalf of three shoppers: Western Australia Forest Alliance, Conservation Council of Western Australia, and the Wilderness Society. [See earlier post.]
Ad Standards has discovered Alcoa’s commercials breached 4 of the 5 requirements contained inside its Environmental Code. The teams’ criticism to ASIC continues to be being assessed.
CCWA Executive Director Matt Roberts mentioned: “Alcoa has taken advantage of the trust of the WA people and provided misleading and deceptive claims to its audience through these adverts. The people of WA deserve better.”
TWS spokesperson Jenita Enevoldsen mentioned: “We consider this intensive promoting marketing campaign of misrepresentation tried to drown-out the voices of specialists in regards to the bleak actuality of Alcoa’s mining practices within the northern jarrah forest.
“Now the spotlight is squarely focused on Alcoa’s lack of social licence to operate. It’s time to ensure they are held accountable, and an end date is put on mining of the irreplaceable jarrah forest.”
EDO Managing Lawyer Kirsty Ruddock mentioned: “Companies that seek to misrepresent the impact of their operations must be held to account, and we are proud to be able to help WAFA, CCWA and the Wilderness Society to do that.”
Ad Standards Environmental Code Breaches – Alcoa Australia
| Standard | Panel ruling |
| Section 1 Environmental Claims in Advertising should: Be truthful and factual. The general impression created by the commercial together with the Environmental Claim shouldn’t be false or inaccurate. Not be or more likely to be deceptive or misleading to the Target Consumer. | BREACHED “The Panel considered that while the advertisement begins with the statement that rehabilitation is happening and includes a qualification that some features of a forest take time to mature, these were not enough to counteract the overall impression that the cleared areas had already been rehabilitated to a point which would look like a forest. “The Panel considered that while the target consumer may understand the land had not been returned to its former state, they were also unlikely to understand that rehabilitation is a long-term project and the areas referred to as rehabilitated may only contain seedlings and not forest. “The Panel considered that the overall impression created by the advertisement was inaccurate and likely to mislead or deceive target consumers.” |
| Section 2 Environmental Claims in Advertising have to be supported by proof | BREACHED “The Panel considered that the overall impression of the ad that rehabilitation had been completed to a point where the area would constitute a forest was not supported by evidence provided by the advertiser.” |
| Section 3 Environmental Claims in Advertising should: Use clear language, having regard to the Target Consumer Be particular – broad, obscure or unqualified claims must be averted Include vital limitations, situations or {qualifications} in a approach that’s clear to the Target Consumer | BREACHED “The Panel considered that the language in the advertisement was not clear or specific to a point where the target consumer would understand that rehabilitation was an ongoing project which had not been completed. “The Panel considered that the advertisement did not contain limitations or qualifications in a way which would make this clear to the target consumer.” |
| Section 4 Environmental Claims in Advertising should: Be a few real profit to the atmosphere Not overstate the environmental profit | BREACHED “For the reasons discussed in sections 1 and 2 above, the Panel considered that the use of the words “rehabilitated” and “forest” meant that the general environmental declare was overstated. “The Panel considered that from the information in the advertisement, it was unclear to what extent the environmental benefits detailed by the advertiser were simply advertising the observance of existing law, as opposed to going beyond it.” |
This web page was created programmatically, to learn the article in its unique location you’ll be able to go to the hyperlink bellow:
https://www.edo.org.au/2025/09/02/alcoas-misleading-forest-rehabilitation-claims-breached-advertising-standards/
and if you wish to take away this text from our website please contact us
