Greenpeaces Unfriend Coal Campaign and Facebook

Submitted to

Prof. Madhushri Srivastava

In partial fulfilment of Written Analysis and Communication course

Date of submission-04.03.2013

SUBMITTED BY

Vaibhav Jain Section D 2012PGP417

Letter of Transmittal
Prof Madhushri Srivastava Written Analysis and Communication Indian Institute of Management, Indore March 3rd, 2013

Dear Mam, This report is written for the partial fulfillment of the Written Analysis and Communication course, on the article Greenpeaces unfriend coal campaign and Facebook. The purpose is to discuss the alternative steps Barry Schnitt, Facebooks director of policy communication, can take to curb negative publicity of Facebook and recommend a solution for that. With this transmittal, the report is subjected to public view and open for further discussions. I look forward to an engaging dialogue if any. Sincerely, Vaibhav Jain Section D 2012PGP417, IIM Indore

Executive Summary
The case describes the issue revolving around Facebooks usage of burning coal as the supplier of electricity to the data facility it planned to build at Prineville, Oregon. Greenpeace, the NGO, involved in its deep commitment to environmental causes, started a campaign Unfriend Coal against Facebook in July 2010. Greenpeace used several mechanisms to demonstrate its stance against Facebooks actions, which was planning to double its capacity, leading to more usage of coal. Greenpeaces Executive Director, Kumi Naidoo sent a letter to Facebooks CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, highlighting the potential disadvantages to the society and the environment caused by the Facebooks actions. He also urged Facebook to use its purchasing power to choose locations what would allow it to rely on only clean and renewable sources of electricity. Greenpeace used Facebooks own social media network to create a Facebook page that provided detailed information about the companys decision to build a new data center, with the implications. It also uploaded a 2-minute video on YouTube against Facebooks actions. The group page and the video got several followers and likes, which led to an increasingly negative publicity for Facebook. Its director of policy communication, Barry Schnitt, had to defend Facebook in a public appearance, but it went in vain. Facebook was faced with the issue how to curb own this negative publicity and what steps should Schnitt take. Few alternatives are recommended, and selected one that required Facebook to join hands with Greenpeace in its initiative to curb down the usage of coal as energy provided. It would also mean that other IT firms that use cloud computing would soon follow.

Introduction
After a strong run of growth which spanned over several years, Facebook, in January 2010, announced opening of a new data center facility in Prineville, Oregon. It zeroed in on Prineville after extensively reviewing the sites across the West Coast as the location had cool, dry air, which would allow the new facility to utilize an airside economizer, a system that brought in outside air to cook internal systems. Since climate of Prineville was cooler, the economizer could be used throughout the year, resulting in better energy efficiency and cost savings. It also offered the best package of resources, which included a suitable climate for environmental cooling, renewable power resources, available land, talented regional workforce and supportive business environment. However, the NGO, Greenpeace, objected that the new facility would be connected to a local utility provider which burned coal to supply electricity. Coal, being one of the largest sources of global warming, Greenpeaces goal was to pressure Facebook into adopting cleaner energy policies. It argued that Facebook as a company could use its purchasing power, global brand and corporate influence to control where it built its infrastructure and advocating the importance of clean energy and setting a strong example for the rest of the IT industry to follow that used cloud computing. Greenpeace used different mechanisms to persuade Facebook to take appropriate measures. It utilized Facebooks own social media against it to provide information about the companys decision to build the data center. Greenpeaces Executive Director, Kumi Naidoo, wrote a letter to Facebook CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, over adopting good corporate governance practices. Also, it commenced a campaign, naming it Unfriend Coal. The demands of this campaign were: 1. Increase the usage of clean energy to make Facebook coal free. 2. Develop a plan to make Facebook coal free by 2021. 3. Educate Facebook users about how the company powers its services and its carbon footprint. 4. Advocate for clean energy at the local, national and international levels. Facebooks director of policy communications, Barry Shnitt, came out to defend Facebook, but it went in vain as Greenpeace stepped up its campaign after that.

Problem Statement
With over 500,000 followers, the campaign from Greenpeace had attracted increasingly negative publicity for Facebook. Since Facebook had no plans to stop building data centers in Prineville, Barry Shnitt, Facebooks director of policy communication, was faced with the pressure as to how to respond to alleviate the negative attention from media and consumers.

Analysis
Greenpeace had numerous achievements under its collar to boast of. The highlights were France ending nuclear atmospheric testing in South Pacific Ocean in 1975, forcing International Whaling Commission to impose a moratorium against whaling in 1982 or making the dumping of radioactive and industrial wastes in ocean permanently banned in 1993. However, when it started its campaigning against Facebook, Greenpeace assumed that making people more aware of the negative implications of using Facebook and about renewable energy, they would actually quit using Facebook. This would also be accompanied by increasing demand of renewable energy. But it is not necessary that by making people more aware would actually lead to change in behavior. There have been numerous studies in the past where evidence showed that information campaigns that emphasize enhancing knowledge or altering attitudes frequently have little or no effect upon behaviour. The only advantage of doing it is that it is easier to implement and execute. It is easy to distribute posters, brochures, broadcast television ads and post Facebook ads. Greenpeace contained this campaign only online, and never took this off-line. The disadvantage of restricting it to online campaigning is that there is only a virtual involvement of people. Majority of them see, react and forget such things. The Greenpeace could have included a panel to encourage people on their campaign page to sign up for emails. The updates on their campaign page should have prompted fans to visit the Greenpeace landing page to sign up to updates, or even join or donate to Greenpeace. On the other hand, Facebook had options such as restricting their usage of coal as energy source to a bare minimum, rather than Schmitt arguing and giving facts against Greenpeace in public. Facebook could also collaborate with Greenpeace to decide and commit to a plan to phase out the use of dirty, coal-fired electricity to power the data centres. Facebook could use its purchasing power to choose locations that would allow them to rely only on clean and renewable sources of electricity. Facebook could also come out and, like Greenpeace, advocate for strong climate and energy policy changes at the local, national and international level to ensure that as the IT industrys energy demand increases, so should the supply of renewable energy. Also, there is an option to use alternate source of energy like wind power or hydro power which was renewable.

Solution
The best option with Facebook seemed to collaborate with Greenpeace to take measures to tackle the coal issue and take this further in order to curb down the negative publicity.

Recommendation
Since Greenpeace had already launched a campaign against Facebook, joining hands with them would solve two problems their campaign would end with no further negative publicity to Facebook, and also Greenpeaces initiatives and suggestions would help Facebook reduce the amount of coal it was using. By this way, it would win over the confidence and trust of people whom they were gradually losing out as fans and friends. If Facebook uses its purchasing power to step up for the good cause, other major IT firms which use cloud computing to power their data centers, like Google, Amazon, Twitter, etc, will be expected to soon follow the steps.