SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
advertising
Shell’s Marketing Head Has No Business Leading the Assoc. of National Advertisers
Few brands have been the subject of more legal, ethical, and regulatory action for their advertising than Shell.
Oct 30, 2025
Last Wednesday, the Association of National Advertisers, an American trade group representing some of the world’s biggest brands and advocating on marketing public policy, appointed the CEO of Shell Brands International, Dean Aragón, as their new president.
That same day, half a world away in the Philippines, survivors of Super Typhoon Odette filed suit against Shell for their decades of contributions to climate disasters like the storm that destroyed their homes.
There is no better contrast to show how far corporate leaders have strayed from common sense when it comes to climate strategy in 2025. Cowed by headlines and short-term thinking, marketers and brand leaders of all kinds have stepped away from taking vital steps needed to protect the planet and the economy that connects us all.
Putting the head of Shell’s marketing into a leadership role at the ANA is a bizarre and self-destructive decision. Shell is the subject of dozens of legal and regulatory actions around the world for misleading marketing, and continues to produce products that directly harm dozens of ANA members in the insurance, health, and food sectors.
A forward-thinking organization with its members' interests at heart wouldn’t put their leadership in the hands of a company that harms every other sector on the planet.
The ANA is made up of companies whose business models are fundamentally threatened by climate change, which is caused by Shell's products—from Piedmont Healthcare and the American Heart Association dealing with diseases caused by extreme heat, to Mars and Anheuser-Busch struggling with higher commodity prices caused by flood and drought.
Shell has recommitted to producing more oil and gas, and less clean energy, despite their own research from the 1970s and 80s onward showing that fossil fuel production posed a fundamental threat to the global economy and the consumers who use their products.
But promoting Shell as a leader in marketing is particularly laughable. Few brands have been the subject of more legal, ethical, and regulatory action for their advertising than Shell.
Their advertising campaigns have been banned in the UK, ruled to be misleading in the Netherlands, cited as evidence in lawsuits in the United States, and are also laughably bad at times. There is no reason to be elevating the mind behind projects like “Shell Ultimate Road Trip”—a Fortnite experience that attracted single-digit users and never worked properly, or cringe-inducing, disturbing AI videos of engineers talking to their "younger selves."
In short, appointing the CEO of Shell's marketing as chair is a guarantee of the ANA losing credibility in the eyes of regulators and organizations with sustainability agendas worldwide. It’s also a sign of a lack of original thinking as the climate emergency grows and clean energy becomes the dominant form of new energy worldwide.
There is no worse representative for the marketing industry, either for regulators or for the rest of the economy, than Shell, and the ANA will lose credibility with Dean Aragón as its figurehead. A forward-thinking organization with its members' interests at heart wouldn’t put their leadership in the hands of a company that harms every other sector on the planet, or one that continues to rely on the old tropes of climate delay and denial.
The marketing industry should be looking to companies in clean energy, healthcare, and the circular economy—all growing sectors with pressing needs for communication expertise—to help chart a sustainable future. Fossil fuels and Shell represent the past and a dead end for marketers everywhere.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Outrageous': NYT Rejects Paid Ad From Quakers That Calls Israeli Attack on Gaza 'Genocide'
"Palestinians and allies have been silenced and marginalized in the media for decades as these institutions choose silence over accountability," said the secretary-general of the American Friends Service Committee.
Jan 08, 2025
The American Friends Service Committee, a Quaker organization, announced Wednesday that it has cancelled planned advertising with The New York Times after the outlet rejected one of the group's proposed ads that read: "Tell Congress to stop arming Israel's genocide in Gaza now! As a Quaker organization, we work for peace. Join us. Tell the President and Congress to stop the killing and starvation in Gaza."
AFSC alleges that after receiving the text of ad, the Times suggested they swap the word "genocide" for the word "war." The word war has "an entirely different meaning both colloquially and under international law," the Quaker group wrote.
AFSC said they rejected this proposed approach and then received an email from outlet's "Ad Acceptability Team" which read, in part, according to AFSC: "Various international bodies, human rights organizations, and governments have differing views on the situation. In line with our commitment to factual accuracy and adherence to legal standards, we must ensure that all advertising content complies with these widely applied definitions."
"New York Times Advertising works with parties submitting proposed ads to ensure they are in compliance with our acceptability guidelines. This instance was no different, and is entirely in line with the standards we apply to all ad submissions," a spokesperson for the Times said in an email to Common Dreams.
AFSC counters that a number of entities and individuals, such as the international human rights organizations Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, have determined that Israel is committing genocide or acts of genocide in Gaza.
"The New York Times advertises a wide variety of products and advocacy messages on which there are differing views. Why is it not acceptable to publicize the meticulously documented atrocities committed by Israel and paid for by the United States?" said Layne Mullett, director of media relations for AFSC, in a statement.
Joyce Ajlouny, general secretary of AFSC, said that "the refusal of The New York Times to run paid digital ads that call for an end to Israel's genocide in Gaza is an outrageous attempt to sidestep the truth. Palestinians and allies have been silenced and marginalized in the media for decades as these institutions choose silence over accountability."
The AFSC has been a loud voice calling for a cease-fire and ending U.S. military support for Israel. For example, in April, the group announced a Tax Day campaign, a day of action where people held events and met with their members of Congress to demand they stop voting to spend U.S. tax dollars on military assistance to Israel.
AFSC staff in Gaza have also provided 1.5 million meals, hygiene kits, and other units of humanitarian aid to internally displaced people since October 2023, according to the Wednesday statement.
This article was updated to include an emailed statement from The New York Times.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'No Excuse': News Outlets Backed by Big Oil Ads Quiet After UN Chief's Call for Ban
An end to fossil fuel advertising on news networks and websites would "hit oil companies where it hurts," said one expert.
Jun 07, 2024
United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres was unequivocal this week in his call for a global ban on fossil fuel advertising—but while outlets like The Washington Post and The New York Times covered his remarks on Wednesday, the corporate media showed little sign of abiding by Guterres demand that they stop helping oil and gas companies to "greenwash" their climate records and their effects on the planet.
The Guardian reported Friday that it received few responses when it reached out to 11 major news organizations and tech companies including Politico and Meta, with a spokesperson for Politico defending its practice of running fossil fuel advertisements alongside news coverage.
"Advertisers are prominently identified, and a clear distinction between news and ads, including sponsored content, is maintained across Politico's platforms," said the spokesperson. "No advertiser or advertisement sways editorial decisions or news judgment."
But as Harvard climate disinformation expert Naomi Oreskes told The Guardian, regardless of their ad policies, outlets like Politico, CNN, and others are likely clouding their audiences' understanding of the gravity of the climate emergency by reporting on the issue—only to then display ads by the companies that are responsible for heating the planet.
"No one is saying this is easy," Oreskes said. "But we need to face the hard stuff."
The Australian grassroots group Climate Council noted on Friday that since Guterres' speech, Channel 10 has continued airing "gas lobby ads like a news bulletin."
As The Guardian reported, an Australian Senate inquiry into greenwashing found that since March, the network has aired segments sponsored by gas industry lobbyists that were "made to look exactly the same as the headlines and using the 10 News sets."
"Big fossil fuel corporations in Australia have become expert greenwashers, gaslighting Australians and cashing in on the climate crisis," said Climate Council.
In his comments, Guterres urged public relations and advertising firms as well as news networks to view fossil fuel advertising the same way they have come to see tobacco ads, which some publications have stopped running in recent years due to the products' human health harms.
Jamie Henn, director of Fossil Free Media, pointed out that the Times said in 1999 that it would no longer display cigarette ads because editors didn't "want to expose our readers to advertising that may be harmful to their health."
Henn implored the Times: "Tell me the same logic doesn't apply to fossil fuels."
The Guardian, Vox, and Le Monde are among global news publications that have stopped selling ad space to oil, coal, and gas companies in recent years. Amsterdam became the first city in the world to ban fossil fuel ads, and France enacted a ban on certain ads for the industry in 2022, while the United Kingdom did the same for misleading environmental terminology in ads this year.
Similar actions globally would "hit oil companies where it hurts," University of Miami professor Geoffrey Supran told The Guardian.
"If Big Oil loses its ability to lobby the public," he said, "its political power to delay climate action will be severely diminished."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular