Deceptive Practices Uncovered: Procter & Gamble Faces Lawsuit Over Misleading Environmental Claims
The Truth Behind Charmin’s Sourcing
A recent lawsuit has shed light on Procter & Gamble’s alleged greenwashing practices, accusing the company of deceiving consumers with false environmental claims about its popular toilet paper brand, Charmin. The lawsuit, filed on behalf of eight consumers, alleges that Procter & Gamble’s sourcing practices are harming the Canadian boreal forest, one of the world’s most vital ecosystems.
Harmful Logging Practices
Despite Procter & Gamble’s public commitment to environmental protection, the lawsuit claims that the company obtains most of its wood pulp from the Canadian boreal forest through harmful logging practices such as clear-cutting and burning. This is in stark contrast to the company’s “Keep Forests as Forests” campaign and the “Protect-Grow-Restore” logo displayed on Charmin packages.
Misleading Logos and Certifications
The lawsuit also accuses Procter & Gamble of misleading consumers with the display of logos from the Forest Stewardship Council and Rainforest Alliance. While these organizations promote sustainable forestry practices, Procter & Gamble uses little pulp from FSC-certified forests, and the Rainforest Alliance no longer has a certification program.
Deception and Violations
The lawsuit alleges that Procter & Gamble’s marketing deceived consumers into buying or paying too much for Charmin, violating the U.S. Federal Trade Commission’s Green Guides. These guidelines help companies avoid making deceptive environmental claims. The lawsuit seeks restitution, compensatory damages, and punitive damages for violations of consumer protection laws in 28 U.S. states and Washington, D.C.
A Call to Accountability
The lawsuit demands that Procter & Gamble be held accountable for its alleged environmental destruction and stop making false and misleading claims of environmental stewardship. The company must also stop making misleading environmental claims and disclose more details about its wood-pulp suppliers.
A History of Pressure
This lawsuit comes on the heels of years of shareholder pressure on Procter & Gamble to source forest products more sustainably. Last month, the company promised to disclose more details about its auditing process by mid-2025. However, Procter & Gamble has restricted some disclosures about its supply chain, citing competitive reasons.
The Case Against Procter & Gamble
The case, Lowry et al v Proctor & Gamble Co, is currently pending in the U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington. As the lawsuit moves forward, it remains to be seen how Procter & Gamble will respond to these allegations and whether the company will be held accountable for its actions.
Leave a Reply