Deceptive practices are used by many organizations to improve their image
Source: iStock / malerapaso
In my last post I discussed how some suffixes, such as -gate, have enjoyed great popularity in English, spawning dozens of new words to describe scandals or controversies (as in “bridgegate” or “deflategate”). In contrast, suffixes like -zilla are employed in narrow domains, such as in terms relating to matrimony (“bridezilla”).
A different suffix is frequently employed to label deceptive behaviors engaged in by corporations, politicians, and others. “-Washing” has been combined with an almost dizzying array of color terms to call out a host of problematic behaviors.
Although such terms are widely used online, only a few have become popular enough to be enshrined in the dictionary. Therefore, a primer for these colorful terms may prove useful.
The original -washing term is “whitewashing,” which can be defined as concealing faults or errors to create a semblance of virtuousness. First used in this way in the early 1700s, it is a metaphorical extension of the much earlier practice of using low-quality white paint or chalk to spruce up fences or walls. Just as the blemishes in wood or other surfaces can be covered up, so too can a person’s or an organization’s less attractive qualities through a good public relations campaign.
Colorful Coinages
Whitewashing may have been the first term of this type, but it has been joined by many others. “Greenwashing,” for example, creates an illusion of environmental stewardship by corporations not known for positive environmental practices, such as when an oil company promotes its recycling efforts. Greenwashing was first used in this way by environmentalists in the mid-1980s.
A related term is “bluewashing,” which derives from the color of the United Nations flag. The UN promoted its Global Compact in 2000 to encourage businesses to crack down on corruption, human rights abuses, and other social ills. Unfortunately, many companies made a public show of signing on but then did little to address these humanitarian concerns.
Also dating from the early twenty-first century is “pinkwashing,” in which an organization might promote LGBTQ+ inclusiveness, perhaps by airing commercials during the month of June (pride month). The color pink has long been associated with homosexuality: the Nazis, for example, forced gay men to wear pink triangles on their clothing, and this color has been reclaimed by the LGBTQ+ community, much as the word “queer” has been.
“Redwashing” dates from the 2010s and has been employed in a couple of different ways. In one usage, a politician or an organization might promote liberal policies, such as social equality, to appear more progressive than they really are. In this case, the color red links the behavior to leftist or socialist ideals.
The term has also been used in Canada to call out companies that support indigenous peoples in an attempt to burnish their corporate image. In this case, “red” refers to the skin color stereotypically associated with native Americans.
Another colorful term is “purplewashing.” This refers to cynically exploiting the ideals of feminism and female empowerment to be more appealing to women. When this is accomplished through commercial messaging, it may be referred to by the less mellifluous term “femvertising.”
How about “brownwashing” or “blackwashing”? These terms refer to the recasting of white historical figures with actors of color. Such color-blind casting, as it is also called, has been a subject of debate for characters in films like Gladiator II and an upcoming biopic about Cleopatra.
“Graywashing” has sometimes been employed to describe the deceptive marketing of products that are claimed to slow the aging process.
Even the color orange has been co-opted to describe such practices: “Orangewashing” refers to deceptive practices involving cryptocurrency, and has also been used to call out publishers who only appear to promote open access publishing. (Why orange? It’s the color of both the bitcoin and open access logos.)
Other Forms of “-Washing”
Not all such terms employ colors, however. “Sportswashing” refers to trying to improve the image of a country or its government by hosting an athletic competition like the Olympics. It dates from the early 2010s. In a similar vein, a government might host a music festival starring popular performers, leading to allegations of “popwashing” by a regime trying to improve its reputation.
“Momwashing” refers to companies that cynically espouse pro-family values. An example would be a corporation with a restrictive family leave policy that posts paeans to motherhood on its social media accounts.
The most recent addition to this group of words appears to be “sanewashing”: attempts by journalists to portray a politician and their verbiage in the best possible light, such as by ignoring the controversial or rambling statements they make at rallies or other political events.
How well do -washing campaigns work? This appears to depend on how skillfully they are managed, since those responsible run the risk of alienating as many people as they attract.
There have been high-profile instances of pinkwashing going awry, for example. The most notable of these may be the boycotting of Bud Light in 2023, when Anheuser-Busch tried to broaden the appeal of its brew with a promotion that included Dylan Mulvaney, a transgender woman. The backlash against the company from its more conservative customers depressed Bud Light sales and also the stock price of parent company AB InBev.
Such setbacks are survivable, of course, but they do illustrate the dangers of relying on subterfuge to enhance one’s reputation — no matter how colorful these practices might be.
Source link : https://www.psychologytoday.com/za/blog/small-talk-and-big-questions/202410/the-colorful-language-of-subterfuge
Author :
Publish date : 2024-10-02 23:55:06
Copyright for syndicated content belongs to the linked Source.
