A sad tree in a Roundabout..

It’s been almost a month since my last post. I have embarked on a project that has always been very close to my heart. Although it is gobbling up my time, it’s truly soul satisfying - I will spare the details for the moment! Meanwhile, I like to share the first ever article I posted on my original blog www.silentdogs.net, written almost a year ago. That isn’t the reason why I am sharing this post with you. I feel the topic is more important, considering the challenges like global warming and how stupid authorities contribute to issues. Here's the original post.

What makes Cinnamon Gardens much nicer than any other metropolitan area? Other than its plush neighborhood, and houses with distinct colonial architecture, along with the giant trees that add much character to the area, this is perhaps the only part of the city that makes you feel good about living in Colombo. These trees have stood the test of time, especially from frequent floods to acts of unscrupulous politicians. In the end, they still stand tall, with their roots gripping the soil and holding the ruins of British road planning principles.

Almost about a month back, I was on my newly acquired (rather forced upon – thanks to new traffic planning) detour towards Alexandra place to get to Rajagiriya. As I was approaching Guildford Crescent on Reid Avenue, there was something dreadfully empty.One side of the road was closed with various shapes of police barricades. I guess anything they could possibly find back in the station has now been converted into potential barricades! Soon it was all clear - the triangle-shaped roundabout with the gigantic tree had become victim of the new traffic plan.

This is insane, as we all know, traffic planning changes every now and then in the city, and we should not allow authorities to destroy our environment. Trees in the city contribute to our welfare perhaps more than any authority in the entire province. I recall a friend telling me about how he had stopped there and yelled at the workers who were chopping down the tree.What’s shocking is that absolutely no one has formally challenged this idiotic act. Where is the Ministry of Environment? Where are all those ‘self-proclaimed’ environmentalists?

Anyways, without beating around the bush - let’s get to the point.Where are all the brands that boast about being environmental-friendly? Shame on you Mr. False Green!! Worse, you missed a great opportunity to express your much celebrated brand values. We all feel let down by such brands, as they failed to do anything about it, especially the brands that used to display placards with false messages to market themselves.

Brand custodians often come up with various marketing activities that include “selling-environment” to make profits, but turn a blind eye otherwise. Think about it, wouldn’t it have been an awesome chance to muster up people who are truly concerned about the environment and those gigantic trees, when no one spoke out.This area houses quite a number of schools, commercial entities, influential neighbours, media stations, and foreigners and of course pissed off commuters. With a good idea, one could have easily united a considerable number of activists under your brand, especially when environmentalists failed to defend our common interests. Besides everything, this was the kind of goodwill that money cannot buy.Unfortunately, most brands limit their concern on environment to product packaging very commonly with a recycle mark. People aren’t stupid any more to fall for mere brand claims. They want to see your philosophy in practice. Behavior is the best way to make people believe in your brand claims. They know you craft your statements for your own political benefit within the category.Personally I believe most people have mistaken the idea of branding for ‘trade-marking’ commodities. Other than the name, there is no real difference between most brands found here. Brand character, personality, brand beliefs all fail to come to real life other than in communications and ‘obvious’ consumer touch points. They fail to capitalize on incidents that come their way.

Going back to the “tree issue”, a brand could have established a heroic-image, self confidence, genuineness in its approach, aggressiveness, and more importantly, gathering passionate nature lovers and giving them leadership and voice. A brand could have immensely benefited from this incident. If a brand must be seen as a person, it must play a role in society. That’s what real people do. If you are an established player, you must become an active opinion leader in matters within your scope.Besides, no one loses anything by fighting for a worthy cause. For example, a brand could have taken the authorities (municipal council, UDA or whoever chopped the tree down) to task by taking legal action. There is nothing wrong in soliciting the assistance of the legal system if your interests are under threat. Now, if you happen to be an environmentalist, perhaps you can suggest what could be done and if you are not, when you have the time, silently water the lawn – that’s still a lot!