Tough talk from Calif.

What good does it do for us to talk to one another about this idiot? The free enterprise system will get it right if we can keep the political interests from disrupting the system. What is needed is to educate the ultimate decision makers (voters) and let the economy operate. Look at the nuclear situation and the price we are paying for letting the unrealistic and uneducated drive that decision. Corn-based ethanol as a fuel is exactly the same, the idiots are creating with our money an industry that the free enterprise system would never create or support. For what?? Political reasons, telling voters they can have cake and eat it simultaneously (a lie) to get votes. Ding

This guy must have been in the same science class as Rosie. In this case you only have to consider the area code of where this stuff originates to realize just how irrelevant it is.

Perhaps it's time for the "Take another look at plastics" campaign to rise phoenix-like.....

It's time for a new approach to combat misguided calls for bag bans.

I keep reading that the key to success depends on "educating consumers" about recycling. Believe me, success has nothing to do with educating consumers.

Despite frequent repetition of this talking point, it's not about educating consumers. It's about marketing to them.

Education is a two-way proposition with pre-requisites. First, learners agree to cooperate in the process, which in turn assumes their responsibility and accountability for the outcome. Not so with consumer marketing. Consumers have in no way, shape or form signed up for the plastics industry's class.

The second pre-requisite for educating is an investment in the results on the part of the student. Consumers however, have invested nothing in the industry's education of them.

And speaking of investments, though consumers have no investment in the outcome, the industry does. So while it�s charitable of the plastics industry to take on the job of educating the public on behalf of its detractors, it will yield no return on its investment. Only marketing can do that.

So, as neither of these pre-requisites are present, trying to educate consumers is the key for failure. The key to success is marketing to them.

Marketing works differently. Because no one signs up for it, it is solely the marketer's job to persuade consumers to buy his pitch - to win their hearts and minds. That means giving them a compelling reason to recycle those bags.

I must say I was thrilled to learn of the PBA, CGA and CRA Coalition's effort in California. Everyone gets high marks for figuring out the message has to go right on the plastic package, or bag in this case. Putting the message right on the bag is a good start. But it stops short of the full potential using the bags has. That's because it doesn�t take advantage of the opportunity to link the bags to the plastic decking where it ends up when recycled: Disney World, Mount Rushmore, for example.

And "Please Recycle This Bag" is not the right message, at least not if you're thinking in terms of consumer marketing as opposed to educating consumers. In addition to lacking the slightest hint of the "compelling" factor, a message reminding consumers to return the bags to the store is fatally flawed in the most important respect: It's great for people who love to recycle, but what about everybody else? How are you going to convince the non-converts to recycle those bags? You give them a reason that goes beyond recycling for recycling's sake.

Like I said, putting the message right on the bag is good for a start. The next step is turning the idea into the "Got milk?" of recycling.

In fact, what I'm talking about is a plan for a category marketing effort for recycling plastic (all polyethylene by the way, not just bags), along the lines of the California Milk Processor Board's Got milk?, only bigger - after all, there's a lot more plastic than milk out there. The message should be Good for WonderLumber. Like the Got milk? campaign, it should be in every grocery store, starting in the parking lot and continuing to all the other in-store marketing possibilities: shopping cart inserts, floor decals, instant coupons, shelf-talkers, end cap displays, check-out dividers, the works - only this time the parking stops, speed bumps, cart stands, railing and whatever other outdoor amenities are needed will be made of WonderLumber. And it will say so for shoppers to see.

And just as Got Milk? teamed up with Oreos, Good for WonderLumber should include clever tie-ins with products in polyethylene packaging, for example:

Which brands are good for WonderLumber? Tide's in. Dirt's out.
It's Not Nice to Fool Mother Nature. If you think it's wood, but it's not, it's Chiffon in WonderLumber.
Fortunately, there is Tylenol in WonderLumber, the one doctors recommend most.
I Can't Believe It's Not Butter! in WonderLumber explains why You Won't Believe It's Not Wood!
and of course, "Did you know WonderLumber's got milk?
And in the process, the industry can build a powerhouse brand as compelling as the Got milk? trademark, not bad as ROI goes.
The fact is, most consumers aren't calling for a ban on bags, or on any other kind of plastic. (PET for bottled water is the latest target.) It's the few, loud voices of local politicians and environmentalists. It's time, first of all, to get out of their orbit and back into retailers' own - the one inhabited by consumers, not PAC's, NGO's and the liberal media, and secondly, to provide an alternative.

Marketers market. Politicians legislate. Keep up the behind the scenes lobbying, but let's also take this where it belongs -- where marketers know the rules of the game, how to play and how to win: the market.

There is another reason we have to take the choice to consumers in the market and get it out of politicians' speeches and advocates' op-eds. That's where they "assume" moral authority - by invoking shame and guilt in the name of the environment. On the Diane Rehm radio program earlier this month, the guests defending the plastic industry were accused of blaming consumers, blaming littering, profiting at the expense of the environment, and allowing men and women to die in Iraq because of plastic bags by the alderman pushing the ban on bags in Annapolis.

This has been going on for over three decades but the pace is picking up. Unfortunately, this, like most environmental issues, has gotten so emotional, a compelling message isn't going to be enough. We need a message that will get rid of the guilt as well: Good for WonderLumber.

It all started when Iron Eyes Cody shed a tear in one of the most successful public service ads ever. That ad invoked shame and guilt to fight littering, and rightly so -- littering is shameful. Preferring plastic, however, isn't. But since then emotions have been hijacked for every environmental cause possible, even when common sense suggests how silly that is. Now, however, we've passed the point where that can even be pointed out. It is a strategy that is leaving manufacturers and retailers stuck in a no-win situation that risks spiraling out of control if something isn't done.

And it's a strategy that's working. Who wouldn't be afraid to push back in this context? No serious business person can afford to risk the consequences. So as a result of playing on their terms and in the absence of an alternative solution other than "educating consumers", we get mind-numbing, statistics-based arguments from manufacturers and retailers who are forced to play defense on their opponent's turf. Resin bans and bag bans are the result.

It doesn't have to be this way. In their relentless quest to regulate the use of the earth's natural resources, politicians continue to ignore Mother Nature's most precious one: human ingenuity. That's why those plastic bags (and milk jugs) are ending up in backyard decks, nature trail walkways, Disney World and Mount Rushmore. That's nothing to be ashamed about and it's time to say so.

Regards,

Claudia Grove
cgrove@wonderlumber.com
www.wonderlumber.com