Should LEGO cut ties with Shell?

[CopMike]

Reply from JVK:

Jørgen Vig Knudstorp, CEO of the LEGO Group, comments on the Greenpeace campaign using the LEGO® brand to target Shell.

The LEGO Group operates in a responsible manner and continually strives to live up to the motto of the company since 1932: “Only the best is good enough”.

We are determined to leave a positive impact on society and the planet that children will inherit. Our unique contribution is through inspiring and developing children by delivering creative play experiences all over the world.

A co-promotion contract like the one with Shell is one of many ways we are able to bring LEGO® bricks into the hands of more children.

We welcome and are inspired by all relevant input we receive from fans, children, parents, NGOs and other stakeholders. They have high expectations to the way we operate. So do we.

The Greenpeace campaign focuses on how Shell operates in a specific part of the world. We firmly believe that this matter must be handled between Shell and Greenpeace. We are saddened when the LEGO brand is used as a tool in any dispute between organisations.

We expect that Shell lives up to their responsibilities wherever they operate and take appropriate action to any potential claims should this not be the case. I would like to clarify that we intend to live up to the long term contract with Shell, which we entered into in 2011.

We will continue to live our motto of “only the best is good enough” and deliver creative and inspiring LEGO play experiences to children all over the world.

Jørgen Vig Knudstorp, President and Chief Executive Officer of the LEGO Group.

[62Bricks]

It's a risky move by Greenpeace. They know they risk alienating people by attacking a very popular international company. If you read the brochure that Greenpeace produced, they praise LEGO for its progressive attitude and high-quality toys. It essentially says,"LEGO is too good to be associating with Shell.

They have already achieved some success by getting LEGO to respond to the campaign. That provides another round of media coverage. But it could still backfire. I imagine the pool of LEGO-buying parents and adults overlaps considerably with the pool of Greenpeace supporters. If Greenpeace wants to pick a fight with LEGO and make people choose a side, they risk losing wider support.

[Transparency for Effect]

Does anyone else find it freaking hilarious the youtube ad was removed by warner bros?

[AyliffeMakit]

Does anyone else find it freaking hilarious the youtube ad was removed by warner bros?

I rather expected it because they did use "Everything is Awesome!" without permission and pictured the main characters in the lego movie drowning in oil, but I do think it's funny that they spent so much time, effort and money creating this inaccurate ad for it to be just taken down a couple of days.

[antp]

I find that rather funny

[1974]

So, who's gonna make a little Brickfilm with one of the GP (air)heads boarding a jet fuled with Shell oil?

It should just be short clip but loop it again and again, 'cause that what he did

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/10920198/Greenpeace-executive-flies-250-miles-to-work.html

Cheers,

Ole

[xtremegoogler]

So, who's gonna make a little Brickfilm with one of the GP (air)heads boarding a jet fuled with Shell oil?

It should just be short clip but loop it again and again, 'cause that what he did

http://www.telegraph...es-to-work.html

Cheers,

Ole

Yes, so Greenpeace is hypocritical.

But does that mean it's okay for LEGO to be hypocritical as well?

On the one hand, collaborating with WWF (when it's about image) and on the other hand working together with Shell (when it's about money).

[Transparency for Effect]

I rather expected it because they did use "Everything is Awesome!" without permission and pictured the main characters in the lego movie drowning in oil, but I do think it's funny that they spent so much time, effort and money creating this inaccurate ad for it to be just taken down a couple of days.

I'm sure they've been pictured worse without being taken down by Warner Bros...

[1974]

Everybody is hypocritical, that's human nature to the bone

Sure, we don't want the arctic to turn in hades of oil, but we sure don't want gas to rise either

Nor do we want LEGO to get (even) more expensive

I think the term is 'collateral damage'

[Brickviller]

Greenpeace...aren't they that group of eco-terrorists with a boss flying an expensive oil fueled jet? On the other hand, now I do feel like getting some of those arctic based city sets... reverse advertisment or something?

[williejm]

Getting the video taken down was a dumb move.

But the good news is, it's already back up!

As you were... #BlockShell

[1974]

No, that was the right move. It's way beyond how much you can mangle IP for fun

Greenpeace vs Warner, who the funk do think will loose?

This is a clear case of GP pissing on everything IP

So, I'm gonna create the anti-enviromental group called Greenpiss .. How long do you think it takes before GP are on my track, telling me stop it?

Blast it, there's _LOADS_ of better ways to save the world anyway

Several MILLION people die every year from the lack of clean water .. Not like the polar bears give a flying funk anyway

Edit : Forgot you can't say naughty words here, sorry

Edited July 11, 2014 by 1974

[DPrime]

Reminds me a bit of when PETA tried to boycott Super Mario Bros because he wore "animal skin costumes" when he powered up, lol.

A bit ridiculous if you ask me... but then again, I wouldn't be too disappointed if Lego amicably disassociated itself with Shell. To be quite honest I didn't know this "partnership" still existed, though I think the vintage Shell sets are pretty cool.

[legoman19892]

Reminds me a bit of when PETA tried to boycott Super Mario Bros because he wore "animal skin costumes" when he powered up, lol.

A bit ridiculous if you ask me... but then again, I wouldn't be too disappointed if Lego amicably disassociated itself with Shell. To be quite honest I didn't know this "partnership" still existed, though I think the vintage Shell sets are pretty cool.

A Dutch company and an English company joined to make Royal Shell Something Something. I bet it also has to do with how plastic comes from oil.

Getting the video taken down was a dumb move.

But the good news is, it's already back up!

As you were... #BlockShell

Youtube things like that are done automatically. The user (GP here) can dispute it and if WB doesn't respond the video goes back up no issue. That is a really really layman way of saying it.

Edited July 12, 2014 by legoman19892

[Ardelon]

Yes, so Greenpeace is hypocritical.

But does that mean it's okay for LEGO to be hypocritical as well?

On the one hand, collaborating with WWF (when it's about image) and on the other hand working together with Shell (when it's about money).

I wouldnt see it as hypocritical. TLG isnt the one drilling in the arctic, much less polluting it, so they arent doing anything wrong to fit the hypocrisy label. And they did stop using packaging mad from Indonesian rainforest wood, or whatever that was about.

[Cyberbricker]

To 1) There was a time I could easily believe organizations like Greenpeace played a major role in awareness and the role of enviro-watchdog. Today however the topic is almost on every dinner table in the developed world. I disagree with the current Greenpeace as I do not think their actions result in a healthy contribution to the overall energy/environment conversation. All of that publicity and opposition but no compromises, no solutions.

To 2) I don't disagree with you. If you told me biofuels were the future I'd be skeptical as well especially with a global food crisis around the next corner. I don't know what the complete energy solution for mankind is. I love the electric roads and the European hydrogen highway proposals. There so many people out there who have ideas on what our balanced energy portfolio should look like. There's many factors and variables involve in paying for the costs of all the infrastructure as well as unforeseen effects and cultural backlash to any initiatives. There's a massive anti-nuclear power lobby growing. Ocean wind farms are turning out to be a viable idea but again people will oppose those too for other reasons.There the technological leaps to be made, then the economic ones of actually implementing them on a national scale. But we gotta give power and room to these organizations and companies to try and find these solutions. Like Lockheed trying to build power plants out of ocean thermal conversion. Or the US Navy trying to run their ships off of algae. Or Exxon trying to harvest bio-gas from our landfills. There is a lot going on and a lot of people looking for solutions wherever they may be. If we aren't involved we need to at least give them the room and not complicate the narrative. Its not gonna happen tomorrow. But we can't all just sit in the dark and turn off our cars in the meantime.

This is why I say people should take a second look at who is actually looking to solve our energy crisis. Its not the people protesting on oil rigs. For the time being we need those oil rigs.

Maybe we can't all sit in the dark and turn off our cars, but we can take small steps in the right direction. Stop using plastic bags for instance, use your bike or those 2 thing underneath you to walk to your destination if is close. I don't even want to own a car and do everything by bike. Don't over consume on food and materialistic things, my cellphone died a few years ago and I just didn't want to get an other one, so I'm cellphone free... <<<< Feels great btw.

[dr_spock]

All those poor LEGO animals and minifigs harmed in the making of their video. We should form PETLA--People for the Ethical Treatment of LEGO Animals.

In an ironic way, they created hazardous household waste by drowning the LEGO in motor oil. Now that LEGO has to go into a landfill or incinerated. Can't be recycled.

[EvilTwin]

We should form PETLA--People for the Ethical Treatment of LEGO Animals.

I'm actually kind of surprised that PETA haven't commented on the unrealistic situation depicted in the 60052 Cargo Train set, which has a cattle wagon carrying one single cow and a bale of straw. In real life, in the US at least, it is more likely that there would be about 20 cows crammed into that wagon with no food or water

[AyliffeMakit]

In an ironic way, Now that LEGO has to go into a landfill or incinerated. Can't be recycled.

... Or they could just give it all to me :P

[williejm]

For those following this story...

Time Magazine article: http://time.com/2976549/this-is-why-people-are-so-upset-at-lego/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=post&utm_term=Lego,time&utm_campaign=Polar&__surl__=Ig0CO&__ots__=1405330015945&__step__=1

Interview with the team behind the video: http://www.directorsnotes.com/2014/07/11/martin-sterling-directs-this-powerful-message-to-lego-in-greenpeace-promo-lego-everything-is-not-awesome/

[Bipin]

The problem though, is that LEGO really only used the Shell brand in its sets associated with Ferrari. In fact, LEGO never even partnered with Shell, with their sets. Having the Shell brand on LEGO's bricks was a result of partnering with Ferrari; a company who, by proxy, associated LEGO with Shell. Ferrari and Shell are long-time partners, so naturally, they decided to sell their LEGO toys at an easily accessible location; gas stations. Keep in mind, this all happened in the 80's, and on a small number of special edition sets. For decades, LEGO has used the fictional brand Octan in their sets. Speaking of which, it's a fictional brand that LEGO chose to make "green"; in current sets Octan is associated with renewable energy.

The only other connection LEGO has with Shell is using them as a supplier of oil; what plastic is made out of. LEGO has even shown interest in plastics (hydrocarbons) derived from alternative organic molecules (e.g. carbohydrates, such as sugar) but at the moment, such a technology just isn't feasible. Whether or not LEGO likes this partnership, it is an inherent need for their industry, just as it is for virtually every other one. I doubt the plastic pens in Greenpeace's office, the chairs, the recycling bins, the computers or cameras used in this very film don't include plastic parts made with Shell oil.

[antp]

LEGO never even partnered with Shell, with their sets.

They did in the 70s and 80s in Europe.

There were several Shell sets in the normal product range, like we have Octan since the 90s.

e.g. these three that I had/have:

http://brickset.com/...-1/Tanker-Wagon

http://brickset.com/...Shell-Tow-Truck

http://brickset.com/...Service-Station

and others with Shell logos:

http://brickset.com/sets/6394-1/Metro-Park-Service-Tower

In North-America there were equivalent Exxon sets:

http://brickset.com/sets/6375-2/Exxon-Gas-Station vs http://brickset.com/sets/6371-1/Shell-Service-Station

http://brickset.com/sets/554-1/Exxon-Fuel-Tanker vs http://brickset.com/sets/671-1/Shell-Petrol-Tanker

and a few others

Also, the more recent ones were not sold by Lego and seemed more of a Ferrari licence, were still related to Shell, made for them, distributed in Shell stations and had Shell logos.

http://brickset.com/...ubtheme-Ferrari

It is not as "bad" has if they still had regular Shell sets sold in toy stores, of course, but in a way I would agree with Greenpeace on the point that they should stop such commercial products. I just find bad the way all that story occurred, since they made it look like if they were still making sets like those from the 70s/80s.

Edited July 14, 2014 by antp

[Moebius118]

Individual actors can and should be held responsible for specific misdeeds. But "Oil or Energy Production" is not in and of itself a misdeed. Unfortunately that is not and has never been the view or approach taken by Greenpeace.

This right here sums perfectly my full opinion on the topic.

Maybe we can't all sit in the dark and turn off our cars, but we can take small steps in the right direction. Stop using plastic bags for instance, use your bike or those 2 thing underneath you to walk to your destination if is close. I don't even want to own a car and do everything by bike. Don't over consume on food and materialistic things, my cellphone died a few years ago and I just didn't want to get an other one, so I'm cellphone free... <<<< Feels great btw.

Yes, I absolutely agree 100%. I grew up in Hawaii where there is an extreme level of respect for the environment, but even there I was told the single most powerful action we can individually contribute for the environment is Conservation. I have lived firmly by that philosophy by never ever wasting food, maximizing the use on all my material goods especially clothing, electronics, even recycling my own packing materials & boxes, and minimizing my waste, gasoline/electricity consumption, and my overall carbon footprint. Not just because it's good for the environment but also it saves a lot of $$$$. ($$$$ later used for my LEGO addiction) But these are changes instituted at the individual level that only massive sociocultural dynamics can instigate. Unfortunately it may be several generations before we truly think and act as a sustainable society and that is why it is important this conversation occurs with as little of the background noise as possible.

BUT I am also firmly a capitalist and industrialist who believes in the economic prosperity offered by modernization, globalization, and yes even corporations.

As with many other things in life, I believe the ultimate answer lies somewhere in between both worlds. Things such as responsible corporations that actively run cradle to the grave analysis on all their production and accounting as well a smart society that works on the individual level to reduce or destroy market demand for surplus/wasteful/unnecessary/inefficient products.

Edited July 15, 2014 by Moebius118

[Cyberbricker]

The problem though, is that LEGO really only used the Shell brand in its sets associated with Ferrari. In fact, LEGO never even partnered with Shell, with their sets. Having the Shell brand on LEGO's bricks was a result of partnering with Ferrari; a company who, by proxy, associated LEGO with Shell. Ferrari and Shell are long-time partners, so naturally, they decided to sell their LEGO toys at an easily accessible location; gas stations. Keep in mind, this all happened in the 80's, and on a small number of special edition sets. For decades, LEGO has used the fictional brand Octan in their sets. Speaking of which, it's a fictional brand that LEGO chose to make "green"; in current sets Octan is associated with renewable energy.

The only other connection LEGO has with Shell is using them as a supplier of oil; what plastic is made out of. LEGO has even shown interest in plastics (hydrocarbons) derived from alternative organic molecules (e.g. carbohydrates, such as sugar) but at the moment, such a technology just isn't feasible. Whether or not LEGO likes this partnership, it is an inherent need for their industry, just as it is for virtually every other one. I doubt the plastic pens in Greenpeace's office, the chairs, the recycling bins, the computers or cameras used in this very film don't include plastic parts made with Shell oil.

In the EU you could save points every time you filled up your gas tank, and with those points you could get exclusive Shell sets, like a shell gas station, shell garage, shell truck...

[antp]

In the EU you could save points every time you filled up your gas tank, and with those points you could get exclusive Shell sets, like a shell gas station, shell garage, shell truck...

Indeed, but that was 15 years ago...

http://brickset.com/.../subtheme-Shell

(I forgot those in my previous post, between the 70s/80s regular sets and the more recent Ferrari sets)

Edited July 15, 2014 by antp