Greenwashing examples: misleading promises and how to check them

Greenwashing examples show that the problem is not always a false statement: it can also be a true detail presented as a benefit of the entire product. A recycled bottle does not establish that the drink is environmentally friendly. Planting trees does not describe a company's entire operation. Before commissioning creator advertising, connect every environmental claim to evidence, a defined scope and limitations the audience will actually see.

Once you have checked the wording, create a brand account on Blogger Bank and describe your product content assignment. Specify what the creator should show, what they may say and what they must not imply. The platform helps organise the collaboration; it does not assess environmental footprints or legally approve your claims.

Three examples: an advertising ruling is not the same as an allegation

The following cases concern specific messages, not assessments of entire companies. The UK ASA rulings are used here to examine advertising presentation; they are neither Polish court judgments nor interpretations of Polish law. For UOKiK, we describe the allegation in the authority's announcement, not a final finding of infringement.

Lipton: small print did not repair an overly broad claim

In its ruling of 19 January 2022 concerning Pepsi Lipton International, the ASA found a poster bearing the claim “100% RECYCLED*” misleading. Small print excluded the cap and label. The ASA considered that the overall impression still suggested that every component of the pictured bottle was made from recycled material. The advertisement could not appear again in the challenged form.

The creative review lesson: examine the headline, image and qualification together. If the evidence covers only the body of the packaging, do not let a shortened caption or the creator's wording extend the promise to the cap, label and contents. Information hidden outside the main message may not change the impression that message creates.

HSBC: a beneficial initiative did not describe the whole business

In its ruling of 19 October 2022 concerning HSBC UK Bank, the ASA challenged posters about transition financing and tree planting. It found that material information about financing activities generating substantial emissions had been omitted. The issue was the overall impression of environmental benefits, not simply the statement that the bank supported the initiatives mentioned.

For a brand, this means separating a project from the picture of the entire business. A video about a packaging change should discuss that packaging change. Do not automatically add a narrative about a “planet-friendly brand”. Even an accurately described project does not support every broader promise an editor might add to the closing frame.

Garnier: explain what the product is being compared with

In its announcement of 16 September 2026, UOKiK reported an allegation against L’Oréal Polska concerning environmental ratings of Garnier cosmetics. According to the authority, consumers were not clearly informed that the comparison covered L’Oréal group products, and the ratings did not indicate compliance with objective environmental criteria. This describes the authority's position at the allegation stage, not a final penalty.

Before using your own scale, green letter or ranking, record which products the comparison covers, what is measured and what the result means. “Better within this group” does not mean “best on the market”. We discuss broader product comparison conditions separately in our guide to comparative advertising and evidence.

Change dates: the EU deadline and the Polish act are separate

Sources checked on 30 October 2026: Article 4 of Directive (EU) 2024/825 specifies 27 September 2026 as the date from which Member States must apply the provisions implementing the directive. Article 3 of the Polish act of 4 September 2026, published as Dz.U. 2026 item 1353, sets its entry into force for 27 September 2027. These are two different dates; they should not be combined into a single “greenwashing ban” date.

We quote the dates in the documents without deciding the consequences of the discrepancy for a particular campaign. This does not mean that earlier advertising escapes scrutiny: the UOKiK announcement described here concerns action already taken. Before launching a message, discuss the relevant rules, market and advertising date with a lawyer. This article is not legal advice. The following checklist is an editorial evidence review process, not confirmation of legal compliance.

From a slogan to a document: a record for each claim

Collect the sentences intended for the creator's speech, captions, post description and product page. Also record what the imagery implies: a leaf resembling a certification mark or a green rating can convey a promise without the word “eco”. Prepare a record for each message that someone outside the marketing team can understand.

• Exact wording: what the audience will hear or read, rather than the working shorthand “environmental claim”.
• Subject: the product, a particular packaging component, a process or a company activity. Add the version and market.
• Evidence: the document, its issuer, date, method and passage supporting this specific claim.
• Limits: exclusions, conditions of use and what the study did not cover.
• Owner: the person who will confirm that the data remains current and stop the claim after a product change.
• Presentation: where the explanation appears in the video, description and landing page.

Do not treat a file named “certificate” as sufficient evidence. Check whom and what it covers, its validity period and permission to use the mark. A raw material supplier's document does not necessarily establish the properties of the finished product. A comparative claim also needs a reference point and a comparable method, not two results obtained under different conditions.

Separate the material's origin from the possibility of processing it after use. “Recycled” and “recyclable” answer different questions. Similarly, a promise of future emissions reductions does not describe a result achieved today. If the document does not establish the scope, pause the claim and ask the data owner for clarification rather than inventing a percentage or period.

The creator assignment: show the feature without inventing an advantage

A training example, not a Blogger Bank client case: a brand wants to show reusable packaging. The team first checks the instructions, permitted uses and product documentation. If reuse is confirmed, the creator can demonstrate that action according to the instructions. They should not independently infer that the product has a smaller environmental footprint than every single-use alternative.

Prepare an assignment on Blogger Bank with a specific deliverable: a video showing the permitted use, captions preserving the claim's scope and a description linking to its explanation. When reviewing applications, check portfolios for the ability to show product details clearly and explain conditions of use. Do not confuse filming skills with an assumption that an environmentally themed profile is a life-cycle assessment expert.

In this example assignment, add: show opening, use and closing again; use the approved sentence; do not add an invented certification mark or phrases such as “no environmental impact” and “saves the planet”. Agree separately whether you are commissioning a file only or publication as well. The general structure is covered in how to write a creator brief; here the crucial elements are evidence and the boundaries of the environmental message.

Reviewing the video: listen, read and watch separately

Compare the finished material with the claim record before accepting it. First listen without the picture, then read the captions and description, and finally watch the complete video. Does every phrase preserve the subject and scope of the evidence? Can the limitations be read on a phone? Has a shorter advertising cut removed the qualification while keeping the broad promise?

Check the thumbnail, button text and linked page too. If the video discusses one packaging component while the product page promises an environmentally friendly product overall, the audience receives inconsistent messages. Advertising disclosure does not repair the substance of a claim; it is a separate matter to address.

Keep the approved file, its description and the version of the evidence supporting the message. Return to the claim record when the supplier, packaging or research method changes. An old video does not automatically remain accurate just because it still looks good. If doubts arise, pause reuse of the disputed wording until the responsible person clarifies it.

Start with one claim for which you have complete documentation. Only then commission content showing that specific feature, rather than a general advertisement for an “eco-friendly brand”.