What They Don’t Say — Where Holding Companies Stand:

The industry knows that they cannot remain silent about climate change.

But despite the sustainability commitments and net zero pledges that agencies and networks have made, they don’t say very much about how they plan to get there and what this means for their relationships with fossil fuel clients. In fact, most agencies have erased references to fossil fuel clients from their websites, so we’ve used web archives to get the full picture.

Here’s what we know so far.

WPP: 

Mark Read, the CEO of WPP, told The Drum that WPP is “not naive about the challenges of climate change”, but demonstrates no intent to reconsider WPP’s large fossil fuel portfolio. Instead, he told Campaign that “Energy companies have to be part of the solution as much as anybody else.” In a conversation with AdWeek, Read said that “We want to work with companies that share our values and share our outlook for the future and energy companies are in the process of doing that…We should be there to support them on that transition.”

In June 2021, WPP made a commitment to “reach net zero in their value chain by 2030.” Read told Campaign that “we can’t engage in greenwashing”, but WPP continues to work for global oil giants that have been called out in court for manipulating and deceiving the public about climate change, including BP, Shell, ExxonMobil and Chevron. WPP's work for BP led to a lawsuit for using their “Advancing Possibilities” campaign to mislead people about their investment in renewable energy. Their work for Chevron is the subject of an active Federal Trade Commission complaint for greenwashing and their work for Shell is the subject of a lawsuit by New York City for misleading consumers. It’s unclear how they will reach net zero while continuing to work for the world’s largest polluters.

Interpublic Group (IPG)

In response to initiatives like Clean Creatives and the Creative Climate Disclosure, which called upon the advertising industry to disclose its fossil fuel clients, IPG and WPP told Reuters “they would not disclose their client lists. Omnicom and Publicis didn’t respond to a request for comment.”

In June 2021, IPG announced climate commitments to source 100% renewable electricity by 2030, reach net zero by 2040 and report their global energy and emissions performance data. In their Sustainability and Environmental Impact Policy, IPG advises their employees to choose double-sided printing, take public transportation and use low-energy lighting — but they haven’t said a word about their relationship with fossil fuel clients. On page 49 of the report, IPG has provided data on how their greenhouse gas emissions decreased from 2019 to 2020 (notably because of the pandemic), but hasn’t provided context for how this may compare with their clients’ carbon footprint. Despite IPG’s climate ambitions, they continue to work with ExxonMobil, Aramco, Valero, Repsol and Equinor — clients who largely have expressed an interest in increasing fossil fuel production. For example, Aramco has noted in their sustainability report that they plan to “increase oil production by 1 million barrels a day by 2027 and boost gas production by 50% by the end of this decade.”

Dentsu: 

In 2015, Dentsu set a goal to use “100% renewable electricity across its worldwide operations where markets allow” and met that target in 2020. This was followed by a substantial decarbonization target that they set in 2021 to “reduce absolute emissions by 90% by 2040 across its entire value chain.” However, their agencies continue to work for Chevron, Saudi Aramco, and Ampol, and any sustainability changes they make across their network cannot balance out the climate impact of working for fossil fuel clients.

Publicis: 

Like other agencies, Publicis has set a carbon neutrality goal for 2030 and committed to reduced consumption. However, their client list includes Total, which plans to restart a $20 billion liquefied natural gas fossil fuel project in Mozambique that has received criticism for displacing communities and causing corruption, violence and severe environmental impacts - along with other fossil fuel giants such as Saudi Aramco.

Omnicom:

In comparison to other networks, Omnicom has not made significant sustainability commitments. They have pledged to reach 20% renewable energy by 2023 and met their goal with 21.5% renewable energy in 2021, but still work with dozens of fossil fuel clients, including ExxonMobil, AGL, API, NAM and National Gas Industry. Omnicom’s CSR website says that “our industry has less of an environmental impact than others,” but that’s not true when you consider the impact of working for oil and gas majors.

Havas

In 2020, Havas launched a CSR wing called Havas Impact+ and the Climate Solidarity Initiative to make a financial contribution to climate projects with each campaign they produce, in an effort to offset carbon emissions. This will represent 0.2% of their overall quote for the service. They have also pledged to lower their greenhouse gas emissions by 60% and achieve carbon neutrality by 2025. So far, they are tracking their progress through office electricity consumption, recycling systems and planting trees. In their CSR report, they report that they have worked on 13 client campaigns that feature the issue of climate change, but have not mentioned whether their new sustainability standards are influencing how they work with fossil fuel clients.

Edelman

A quick Wikipedia search of Edelman shows an extensive history of creating astroturf campaigns and working with fossil fuel clients, which starts from the fourth sentence. Despite being a PR giant, their online presence is an interesting case study in public relations, with “controversies” as the largest section on their Wikipedia page. The Guardian has even named their CEO Richard Edelman as one of “America’s top climate villains”, alongside Mark Zuckerberg and Charles Koch, for Edelman’s work “peddling climate denial.”
One day after Clean Creatives’ #EdelmanDropExxon campaign in November 2021, Richard Edelman issued a statement saying “We do not accept climate assignments that aim to deny climate change and we do not work with coal producers.” However, in September 2021, Gizmodo reported that Edelman was involved in an Exxon campaign “encouraging people to oppose climate policy.” In March 2021, a BuzzFeed investigation revealed tax filings that show that Edelman was paid over $4 million for its work with the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers in 2019.

Edelman announced the results of a three month climate review of its clients in January 2022. Despite acknowledging the role its clients play in Edelman’s carbon footprint, they have made no public announcements of changes in client policy, or whether they have ended work with major polluters. The one exception seems to be that a contract with South African bank Standard Bank fell apart over Edelman’s unwillingness to work on behalf of the controversial EACOP oil pipeline, which Standard finances. While this is a sign of progress, it’s clear that more needs to be done.