Electronic vs. Printed Communication: The Sustainability Battle (Part III)

I’ll try to keep this short and sweet. The idea of full lifecycle analysis of print and paper versus digital and electronic communication seems to be gaining steam.  The result: print and paper might not be as bad as advertised and perhaps we should be focusing more of our attention on the digital and electronic media.

In honor of Earth Day, I thought it might be a good time for a follow-up on my previous posts about the sustainability battle between electronic and printed media.

 

Let me be clear: I am not advocating the elimination of digital media.  On the contrary, I am a big supporter of it.  What I am not a fan of is the false notion that paper and print are more harmful to the environment than digital.  If you really dig deep and think of the total lifecycle of a product, you can clearly see how that particular product, from cradle to grave (or cradle to cradle) has the ability to impact the environment.

 

I recently came across a couple of articles that correspond directly with what I am trying to achieve through this dialogue; one from the New York Times and one from PBS. In addition, this post from the Dead Tree Edition blog discusses what one publication did to fully understand what its environmental footprint really is.

 

Point is, let’s really think about these matters in a way that encompasses everything.

 

I look forward to hearing your feedback on this post. Feel free to contact me any time!

• Tags:
• Arandell
• paper
• The green perspective

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website