The reason this report doesn't hold much water for me, is not because it disrespected Nintendo (who is my father, not my mother, silly :P) but the manner in which it goes about reporting, which is to sensationalise.
Half the news articles on the internet about this topic state that "Nintendo is bad for the environment" and Greenpeace does nothing to correct this. The reality is that this is a failing on behalf of Nintendo's PR department and not necessarily their green standards. In essence, it's not that Nintendo is actually doing anything bad but that it doesn't measure up to Greenpeace's standards of disclosure.
Now i agree that Nintendo could easily pick up it's game in this regard, but in the end what is more important, that a company is actually green or that it's seen to be green? That is why i'd argue it more important for them to look at the products rather than green propaganda produced by the various PR departments.
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
