Greenwashing doesn’t always look obvious. The most misleading tactics often hide in plain sight, camouflaged by calming language, curated aesthetics, and half-truths. Here’s how to spot the most common forms of greenwashing, and why they’re essential to question:
Vague Language
Words like “green,” “eco-friendly,” “non-toxic,” or “natural” may sound reassuring, but without clear definitions, certifications, or context, they’re essentially meaningless. Many companies rely on these feel-good terms without offering any proof to support them. “Natural,” for example, could mean anything from minimally processed to simply plant-derived—yet that ingredient might still be harmful to ecosystems or sourced unethically.
- What to look for: Does the brand explain why something is eco-friendly or how it reduces harm? Are there third-party certifications to validate the claim? Transparency should always accompany bold statements.
Hidden Tradeoffs
Sometimes a product highlights one seemingly sustainable feature—like compostable packaging or “zero waste” design—while ignoring larger environmental impacts, such as emissions from transportation, use of petrochemical ingredients, or unsustainable manufacturing practices. This is called a “single attribute” claim, and it’s often used to distract from more significant issues. It’s like wrapping a plastic item in recycled paper and calling the whole thing green.
- What to look for: Does the company address the entire lifecycle of the product—from raw materials to disposal? Are efforts to improve holistic, or just focused on one easy win?
Irrelevant Claims
A classic example: “CFC-Free.” That might sound environmentally conscious—except CFCs (chlorofluorocarbons) have been banned in many countries for decades. Including it on packaging makes the product seem eco-responsible without doing anything beyond following the law. This tactic implies an environmental benefit where none truly exists, taking advantage of consumers who may not be aware of industry regulations.
- What to look for: Is the claim highlighting something expected or legally required? Are you being sold on basic compliance instead of intentional stewardship?
Imagery Over Substance
Many brands dress their products in the visual language of sustainability: muted greens and browns, hand-drawn leaves, kraft paper packaging, and calming typography. While beautiful design isn’t inherently deceptive, when it's used without substance, it becomes part of the greenwashing toolkit. This approach uses aesthetic cues to emotionally suggest responsibility, even when the product itself has no meaningful environmental value.
- What to look for: Is the visual message backed up with clear, measurable action? Does the brand communicate how it’s reducing harm—or just look like it is?
Lack of Transparency
Perhaps the most telling sign of greenwashing is a brand that won’t—or can’t—answer basic questions about their sourcing, ingredients, labor practices, or impact. If a company is genuinely committed to sustainability, they should welcome these questions—not avoid them. When you can’t find any detail beyond generic claims, or when a brand responds with vague reassurances instead of concrete information, it’s a red flag.
- What to look for: Does the company publish detailed sourcing information, environmental metrics, or reports? Do they openly share progress and setbacks? Are they accountable to a third-party standard—or just their own marketing?