Content

Hypocrisy in the Garment Industry: Why The North Face has seen backlash regarding greenhouse gases

For a few years now, brands have been veering away from associating with companies who account for a large portion of the greenhouse gas emissions. Backed by social pressure and government incentives, brands who either use or are in clear support of renewable energy tend to have a much stronger brand awareness. Issues arise when these high-powered brands claim one thing and then act differently, and that seems to be the case for The North Face.

If you have spent any time on the marketing side of social media in recent days (pages like Adweek, Fox Business, “marketing-tok”, just to name a few), you would have seen a lot of backlash towards a widely popular brand, The North Face. The backlash comes from the decision to reject an oil and gas company from printing their logo on a North Face product for company use. It was reported that North Face rejected the design idea in order to show solidarity against the big greenhouse gas emitters, however in early June of this year, Chris Wright, the CEO of Denver-based Liberty Oilfield Services, took matters into his own hands by posting the following video:

Being a clothing company in opposition of fossil fuel use is a major gain for brand awareness and brand recognition. The North Face has a history of strong environmental messaging, through their commitment to improving environmental performance and social responsibility in the supply chain. Since North Face is a brand that incorporates environmental change in their CSR, it came as quite the surprise when we find out that roughly 90% of their products are made with petrochemicals. The irony of the rejected purchase order is that the jackets are made from the same products that The North Face refuses to promote.

From a CSR standpoint, it is a bad look for a company to push a sustainable lifestyle (through their packaging, use of responsibly sourced apparel fabrics, and working with suppliers to reduce their carbon footprint), while at the same time using non-renewable energy to produce their products. Since The North Face is a brand that promotes top tier quality products, one of their main fabrics used is nylon, often with a polyurethane coating (waterproof). This puts the brand in a questionable position because while their intentions are good, their practices are subpar. Nylon and waterproof coating are still being produced with petrochemicals and until there is a breakthrough in the manufacturing process, The North Face brand will continue to be in this state of preaching sustainable practices yet producing un-sustainably.

When Chris Write published the “thank you North Face” video, the public had a lot to say about it. The YouTube video was met with comments like:

“I love it that you took a stand on this hypocrisy! The billboards are GREAT! Finally, a CEO with moxie and common sense!!”
“If you look at North Face’s parent company, VF Corporation, they also own Dickies and Bulwark. Bulwark is probably the leading manufacturer of Fire-Resistant Clothing for the oil and gas industry. This has nothing to do with company values, only politically correct marketing. I’m proud to see a CEO in our industry standing up for us.”
"I just flagged this video with YouTube and filed an incident report with the thought Police: this video needs to be REMOVED NOW! Although 100% accurate, this message does not fit the narrative....Chris, when will you and others begin to realize the truth no longer matters!”

Comments like these prove that the general public realizes the issue at hand and want to see The North Face held accountable. To this day (June 9, 2021) The North Face has yet to respond to these allegations, however the longer they wait to address the elephant in the room, the more negative their brand awareness becomes.

So next time you are shopping for high performance outdoor gear, remember, to not always take whats advertised for face value.