Mr. Tree Gets the Axe

After two years in the #43 slot, D. Eadward Tree, the writer of this blog, has been pruned from The RISI Top 50 Power List of the most influential people in the global pulp and paper industry.

The respected paper-industry publisher came out with its new list today, and I wasn't on it. I had to make way for the likes of Greece ("Tell me more, tell me more"), Starbucks, the iPad3, and a bunch of people who actually work in the pulp and paper industry. The good news is that the founder of TwoSides made the list, while Toshiba did not.

RISI had previously honored me primarily for Dead Tree Edition's coverage of the black liquor tax credits, a boondoggle that allowed U.S. pulp manufacturers to hijack a federal biofuel program.

But, as I pointed out last year in objecting to my repeat appearance on the list, my many articles on the subject (51 and counting) have actually changed nothing. The pulp companies collected their billions of dollars from the original black liquor tax credits, are still cashing in on Son of Black Liquor, and still haven't figured out how whether the income is taxable.

Related articles:

• Rupert, Weiner and Cardboard Animals: 5 Who Should Be Ahead of Me on RISI’s Top 50 Power List  
• Dead Tree Edition Tops Twitter and the World Cup
• Not Dead Yet: Son of Black Liquor Has Not Been Vanquished, Contrary to News Reports 
• Who in the World Is D. Eadward Tree? 
• 1/1: Interview with D. Eadward Tree, Chief Arborist at Dead Tree Edition

Read More

9 Lessons From Toshiba's No-Print Day Debacle

Was it the negative feedback from printing-industry customers?

Or maybe seeing its "#noprintday" hashtag taken over by critics who screamed "Greenwash!"?

Or perhaps it flinched when the industry it attacked held up the mirror to its own questionable environmental record. (As the old cheer goes, "U-G-L-Y, You ain't got not alibi. You're ug-LY!")

For whatever reason, a U.S. arm of Toshiba pulled the plug today on its National No-Print Day campaign. Michael Makin, President and CEO of Printing Industries of America, announced the news this morning after a conversation last night with a Toshiba executive.

A few hours later, Toshiba's "Tree" spokescharacter got the axe; his video and web site were disabled. (Disclosure: Mr. Tree is no relation to D. Eadward Tree, the writer of this blog. I wouldn't touch him with a 10-foot branch.)

But let's not celebrate too much before absorbing some lessons from this saga:

1. We print lovers are still doing a crappy job getting the word out about how printing and paper usage are not necessarily bad for the environment. How many people do you suppose were involved in conceiving and approving of the No-Print Day campaign? (The main Toshiba web site linked to the campaign for the first few days, so the effort wasn't confined to some obscure corner of the organization.) Apparently not one of them questioned whether the campaign would actually help the environment or realized the effort would create a fact-based backlash.


2. We environmentalists aren't doing much better getting the word out about the importance of buying environmentally friendly paper. If the message had reached Toshiba, the company would have recognized its vulnerability on environmental issues and avoided discussions of paper and the environment. It would not have indirectly attacked makers of office paper like Domtar and Sappi, which have it beat on transparency and probably on environmental stewardship as well.


3. The printing and paper industries, and the media that serve them, were asleep on the job. Toshiba announced the campaign on June 4, and a few industry web sites dutifully posted the news release. But, as far as I can tell, there was no public word of complaint or criticism until an obscure blog called Dead Tree Edition posted an article six days later. And that didn't have much impact until the issue was covered by more respectable outlets like Printing Impressions and WhatTheyThink? over the next few days. 


4. The printing industry may have been slow to react, but the paper industry (both companies and trade associations) hardly responded at all. TwoSides jumped into the fray quickly, but otherwise the industry was amazingly quiet considering that National No-Print Day was fundamentally an anti-paper campaign. Was the American Forest and Paper Association still putting on its armor when Toshiba capitulated, or did it decide to sit out this battle altogether?


5. It may be getting harder for big corporations to get away with greenwashing. Maybe.


6. I take back the awful things I said about Twitter three years ago. Much of the Battle of Toshiba -- some people would say most of the battle -- was fought on the Battlefield of Twitter. Social media, especially Twitter, were certainly the main means of building the rapidly growing anti-Toshiba grassroots effort that spread word of a boycott and turned "#noprintday" into a tool for embarrassing the company. And it was fun to watch and participate.


7. Individuals, especially well-informed individuals aided by social media, can make a difference. I'm seeing congratulatory comments today like "David vs. Goliath" and "Whale Wars" describing how a loose confederation of concerned people -- not big companies -- stymied a major Japanese corporation.


8. Non-traditional media outlets played a crucial role in turning Toshiba around -- or so people are telling me. I'm sure the traditional trade media had much larger audiences for their Toshiba articles, but the confederation was tweeting and linking to content from sites like PrintMediaCentr and Dead Tree Edition; I've never had so many "RTs" (retweets). Deborah Corn of PrintMediaCentr (the Goddess of Social Media for the entire Printerverse, who has written her own engaging account of "Occupy Green Street") helped me understand why: "You and I can blast Toshiba -- freely. We can tweet and post and rile the masses without a care in the world about any 'approval' or if Toshiba sponsors any of our events or exhibits or whatever else." And, as one supporter pointed out, the mainstream media won't use phrases like "turd in the punchbowl" in headlines.


9. Social-media buzz doesn't necessarily equate to large audiences for a web site. My three previous articles on Toshiba enjoyed plenty of retweets and stirred up lively discussions on several LinkedIn groups. But together they have about 3,000 page views so far, which is less than a single non-Toshiba article I published three days ago.

One final question: Do you suppose Toshiba will want to exhibit, or even be allowed to exhibit, at printing industry trade shows any time soon? In fact, was the aborted campaign a sign that Toshiba no longer cared about selling to the printing industry and is planning to shut down that part of its business?

Read More

Greenpeace Sticks It To Toshiba: Company Has No Paper Policy

Update: Toshiba pulled the plug on its campaign the day after this article appeared. See 9 Lessons from Toshiba's No-Print Day Debacle for the full story.
 
Toshiba's misleading "No-Print Day" campaign may be an attempt to distract us from the company's dismal environmental record.

Greenpeace ranks the company tied for #13, out of 15 major manufacturers, in the latest edition of its annual Guide to Greener Electronics.

Toshiba's score of only 2.8 on a scale of 10 is actually an improvement over the previous year, when Greenpeace penalized it for backtracking on a previous commitment to remove certain hazardous materials from its PCs -- and lying about it.

But here's the kicker: The Greenpeace report says Toshiba "fails to score on paper sourcing as it does not have a paper procurement policy which excludes suppliers that are involved in deforestation and illegal logging."

So the company that wants to lecture us about the environmental impact of print and paper doesn't seem to be doing anything to reduce its own impact.

Toshiba Group's sustainability report says it uses 85,000 tons of packaging materials a year, almost all of it cardboard and other forest products. But nowhere is there a reference to policies on paper purchasing. Nothing about recycled fiber, supporting sustainable forestry, or avoiding purchases from companies that are destroying the Indonesian rainforests.

That raises a question: Which is better for the environment: Going without printing for one day? Or refusing to do business with a major company that fails to take a leadership role on responsible paper purchasing and tries to cover its tracks with blatant greenwashing?

For more on Toshiba's ill-considered effort to make Oct. 23 "National No-Print Day", see:

• 10 Questions About Toshiba's No-Print Day: The article that apparently started stirring up the printing industry a couple of weeks ago about how one of its suppliers was trying to demonize printing. 
• Toshiba's No-Print Day As Popular As a Turd in the Punchbowl: Leading thinkers in the printing industry react to Toshiba's blatant greenwashing effort.
• Calling all Print-Archists: Take a REAL STAND Against Toshiba’s No-Print Day!: PrintMediaCentr suggests some creative guerrilla tactics to use against Toshiba's "marketing scam". 

Read More

Hurry It Up, Key Senator Tells Postal Regulatory Commission

Chastizing the Postal Regulatory Commission for taking 12 months to issue an opinion on ending Saturday delivery, Sen. Thomas Carper (D-DE) is asking the panel to work faster on other proposals to streamline the U.S. Postal Service.

"At a time when the Postal Service is reporting losses of$25 million a day and is doing all it can to head off financial collapse, there is a clear need for postal management to take a number of steps to streamline operations and adjust the Postal Service's network and product offerings to reflect the changing demand for hard-copy mail," Carper wrote in a letter dated yesterday.

Carper, co-sponsor of the Senate's main postal-reform legislation, said the PRC's advisory opinions "have been of great value to the Postal Service, Congress, and postal customers." But he expressed concern about the "lengthy, courtroom-style process" the commission has used in developing such reports.

The PRC's split decision on five-day delivery "suffered from a lack of focus on the key issues that I believe needed examination during the debate about moving to five-day service," Carper wrote. He recommended that the panel set time limits on its consideration of USPS's proposed changes to service levels.

A drawn-out process for considering such changes would "run the risk that the Postal Service could be forced to act on its proposal before the Commission has had a chance to share its thoughts and findings," Carper wrote. That could result in USPS making "serious mistakes in implementing a service change that might have been avoided had postal managers had the benefit of the Commission's counsel."

Related articles:

• Divided PRC Presents Its Opinion on Saturday Delivery  
• 5-Day Delivery: Maybe the PRC's Decision Is In the Mail  
• Postal Watchdogs Trying to Unleash USPS Innovation

Read More

Toshiba's No-Print Day As Popular As a Turd in the Punchbowl

Update: Toshiba pulled the plug on its campaign. See 9 Lessons from Toshiba's No-Print Day Debacle for the full story.
 
In the last three days, it seems, nearly every leading commentator on the U.S. printing industry has spoken out against Toshiba’s ill-conceived National No-Print Day.

Words like “boycott”, “hypocrites,” and “what were they thinking?” keep popping up in various articles, comments, LinkedIn discussions, and tweets about the giant corporation’s clumsy campaign. “Toshiba’s Hatchet Job” was the headline on Richard Romano’s Going Green blog for WhatTheyThink.com, which analyzed Dead Tree Edition's June 10 article, 10 Questions About Toshiba's No-Print Day.

“Some lunatic PR person evidently convinced Toshiba head honchos that this insane, made-up event would bring them public praise. Ha! it backfired badly!” said Margie Dana, founder of Print Buyers International, author and Printing Impressions columnist.

“Doesn’t Toshiba manufacture print production machines?” wrote Heidi Tolliver-Walker of The Digital Nirvana. “This would almost be comical if Toshiba weren’t embarking upon a national ad campaign to promote the idea.”

“I declare 10/23 is ALSO National Toss Your Toshiba Day,” commented Deborah Corn, chief operations officer of PrintMediaCentr and founder of the 37,000+-member Print Production Professionals group on LinkedIn.

"Wonder how many printers have Toshiba equipment. Might be time to turn in your lease," Dr. Joe (WhatTheyThink.com economist Joe Webb), tweeted today. Yesterday's gem of a tweet: "Toshiba? 'This situation requires a really futile&stupid gesture be done on somebody's part! We're just the guys 2 do it'- Animal House".

“Printing is the only medium with a one-time carbon footprint—all other media require energy every time they are viewed. Electronic devices, which Toshiba produces, for example, require the mining and refining of dozens of minerals and metals, as well as the use of plastics, hydrocarbon solvents, and other non-renewable resources,” pointed out Michael Makin, President and CEO of Printing Industries of America. “Moreover 50–80 percent of electronic waste collected for recycling is shipped overseas and is often unsafely dismantled. For Toshiba to call for such a ban on printing is hypocritical to say the least.”

“Overall, besides some hefty greenwashing it sounds to me like they are shooting themselves in the foot,” wrote Sabine Lenz, founder of PaperSpecs and a vocal proponent of using environmentally friendly paper. “Exhibiting at DRUPA but badmouthing paper? Which brings up the question, should Starbucks give the coffee beans a day off?”

“Toshiba seems to have ignored the environmental impact of electronic communications. Just saying you are eliminating print and paper really does not mean you are necessarily helping the planet,” wrote the advocacy group Two Sides in challenging Toshiba’s claims. “Have Toshiba considered the life cycle of all their own products before professing expertise on others?”

Publishing industry pundit (and former press operator) BoSacks thinks the printing industry bears some of the blame: “Our industry has never put forth the full effort to explain itself. If it did, it did it as poorly as Toshiba. The public thinks we cut down virgin forests. That is the real issue here – tree farming, renewable industry. We are tree savers, not tree murderers.”

Read More

10 Questions About Toshiba's No-Print Day

Update: Toshiba pulled the plug on its campaign. See 9 Lessons from Toshiba's No-Print Day Debacle for the full story.
 In a stunning display of greenwashing and ignorance, a U.S. branch of Toshiba has proclaimed October 23 National No-Print Day.

To raise awareness “of the impact printing has on our planet” and of "the role of paper in the workplace,” Toshiba America Business Solutions is asking people and companies not to print or copy anything that day.

"We know that approximately 336,000,000 sheets of paper are wasted daily -- that's more than 40,000 trees discarded every day in America,” Bill Melo, a Toshiba America vice president, said this week in announcing the effort.

The company is promoting the campaign with a series of web videos featuring Tree, an “affable spokescharacter” and alleged Toshiba employee. Viewers are asked to sign a pledge to give Tree “and his leafy colleagues” the day off.

The first video has a goof: Tree is shown marking Oct. 23 on a paper calendar. (Dude, that could be your cousin you’re writing on.) But even more serious are the questions Toshiba needs to answer, such as:

1. What is the source of that statistic about 336 million sheets of paper wasted every day, and what exactly do you mean by “wasted”?
2. According to that statistic, one tree is “discarded” for every 8300 sheets -- less than 90 pounds of office paper -- that is "wasted". But only one-third of that 90 pounds comes from whole trees; the rest is from sawmill residue and recycled fiber. What idiot is getting a yield of only 30 pounds of paper from an entire tree?
3. Paper is made mostly from renewable resources and has a high recycling rate. Ink and toner cartridges, including those with the Toshiba brand, are made mostly from non-renewable resources and are not often recycled. Have you considered that much of printing’s impact on our planet has nothing to do with paper usage?
4. Why is it necessarily better for the planet to read a report on an electricity-burning computer than on sheets of paper?
5. You promise to plant some trees if we take the pledge. Will Toshiba actually plant the trees, or are you paying someone else to plant them? Where will the trees be planted? What will happen to the land if no one takes the pledge?
6. You imply that the harvesting of trees is inherently evil. If private landowners can no longer make money from trees, they’ll seek other uses of their land. Would it be better if they planted wheat? Or maybe shopping centers?
7. American farmers “discard” far more than 40,000 corn plants every day in the process of harvesting them. Are you going to organize a No Corn, Ethanol, or Grain-Fed Meat Day?
8. Toshiba makes a variety of electronic products. Are you planning to celebrate a No-Toxic-Materials-in-Laptops Day?
9. If we take the pledge to give Tree a day off, how are we supposed to blow our noses on Oct. 23? And will Toshiba America offices remove the toilet paper from their restrooms that day?
10. Why the hell did Toshiba just exhibit at Drupa, the world’s largest trade fair for printers, if one of its divisions was going to turn around and publicly trash the entire printing industry?

Other articles about greenwashing and paper include:

• OK, Johnny, Now Greenwash Your Hands 
• Google Using Blatant Greenwash To Promote New Catalog App
• Smackdown: Printed Editions vs. Digital Editions

Read More

Why Does the Postal Service Cling to a Money-Losing Monopoly?

The U.S. Postal Service and American publishers are locked in a lose-lose relationship. Maybe they should consider a divorce.

For every dollar it spends on delivering newspapers and magazines, USPS claims it only receives 75 cents in postage. Meanwhile, notes the Columbia Journalism Review (in Postage due: The USPS is running out of money. Where does that leave magazines?), magazine publishers are growing worried about the increase in customer complaints regarding lost, damaged, and late issue. They fear coming changes will only make matters worse.

New interest in bypassing the Postal Service by using private delivery services was much in evidence at a recent magazine-industry summit, CJR reports.

But publishers also pointed out a major barrier to private delivery: Their subscribers want “to get their magazines in their mailboxes, rather than tossed at the end of the driveway like a newspaper. By law, only the USPS can put mail in mailboxes.”

Maybe the Postal Service would be better off loosening its grip on the mailbox monopoly by granting an exception for periodicals. (After all, whoever heard of a money-losing monopoly?) Not only would the agency lose unprofitable customers, it could actually charge the publishers a fee for each mailbox they use.

Allowing delivery only to paying subscribers and restricting the use of loose inserts could prevent the mailbox privilege from siphoning off profitable postal business.

A tougher problem to control would be cherry picking – publishers using private delivery only for densely populated neighborhoods that are easy to serve, leaving the high-cost areas to the Postal Service.

Then there’s the question of what “cost” means in Postalspeak. If the Postal Service says it costs 35 cents to deliver a particular magazine, how much will it save if it doesn’t have to handle that magazine?

Probably much less than 35 cents. A lot of that 35 cents is an allocated portion of expenses that exist regardless of whether the magazine is delivered.

But permanently losing a sizeable chunk of the labor-intensive Periodicals Class business might be enough to move the cost needle. That's especially true as USPS downsizes and shifts toward a flexible workforce, which should make its costs more sensitive to mail volumes.

What's clear is that the current arrangement is not working for the Postal Service or for many publishers.

Related articles:

• Thrown Overboard: Publishers Feel Abandoned by the U.S. Postal Service 
• Postal Study Is Bad News For Publishers 
• Special Mail Processing of 'Hot' Publications To End Friday

Read More