Have you ever noticed how sometimes big problems, like pollution or waste, get blamed on everyday people instead of the companies that might be causing them? This isn’t always an accident. Sometimes, companies use clever strategies to shift the focus away from themselves.
Imagine a factory making a lot of pollution. Instead of cleaning up its act, the factory runs ads saying pollution is caused by people not cleaning up enough. That’s Deflection Marketing in a nutshell. It’s when companies whose actions might cause harm (like polluting the environment or selling unhealthy products) try to make it seem like the problem is really caused by individuals, like you and me. They do this to avoid changing their ways or facing new rules that might cost them money.
Enter Deflection Marketing
Our planet is loaded with serious challenges—pollution, waste overload, unhealthy food choices, climate change. When these big-scale problems arise, we quickly turn inward, asking ourselves, “Am I doing enough?”
We recycle diligently in our homes. We agonize over buying plastic, worry about water waste, stress over microplastics and rethink our diet choices. Of course, personal stewardship matters greatly. But here’s the tricky part: Often, our efforts mask a deeper issue.
Many widespread problems aren’t caused mainly by individual choices. Yet we’re still made to feel as though they were.
This isn’t an accident—it’s a carefully crafted strategy called Corporate Deflection Marketing.
Deflection Marketing™ | noun
Pronunciation: /dəˈflek·ʃən ˈmɑːr·kə·tɪŋ/
Definition:
A strategic communication practice used by corporations to shift public accountability from systemic, organizational actions onto individual consumer behavior. By redirecting scrutiny, Deflection Marketing avoids regulatory consequences and deeper structural change, often while presenting a false sense of consumer empowerment or moral agency.
4 Pillars of Deflective Marketing:
Freedom Framing – Emphasizing individual choice to resist regulation.
Guiltwashing™ – Leveraging guilt and moral responsibility to shift blame.
Greenwashing – Performative sustainability to be associated with greener brands.
Sciencewashing – Funding biased research from reputable institutions to support a claim.
Concept Trademark of Whole Whale in 2025 by George Weiner, founder of Whole Whale, a leading Marketing and Analytics Agency focused on nonprofits.
Example in a sentence:
“BP’s carbon footprint campaign is a textbook case of Deflection Marketing—it made climate change feel like your fault for not unplugging your toaster.”
The 4 Pillars of Deflection Marketing
1. Greenwashing: Pretending to Be Greener Than They Are
“Greenwashing” is like putting a green coat of paint on something that isn’t actually environmentally friendly. Companies do this to make customers think they are helping the planet by buying their products. This term has been around since 1986, coined by Jay Westerveld to explain how hotels were using towel reuse as a way to save costs rather than save the environment.
- Superficial Sustainability Claims
Volkswagen and H&M talk about being eco-friendly, but the changes they make are small and don’t fix the real problems. - Misleading Environmental Branding
Dow Chemical and Coca-Cola use green colors and nature images to look good, even though they keep polluting behind the scenes. - Loose Cause Associations (Cause Marketing)
Chevron and oil companies sponsor good causes and invest token amounts in green energy to look like they care, but it doesn’t match how their businesses actually work.
How it works:
They might use fuzzy words like “eco-friendly” or “natural” on labels without any real proof. Or they might brag about one small “green” thing they do, while ignoring much bigger environmental problems caused by their business. For example, a company might advertise a bottle as “100% recyclable,” but not mention that very few bottles actually get recycled or that making the plastic caused pollution in the first place.
Why it’s deflection: It makes the company look good and environmentally responsible without them having to make big, real changes to how they operate. It tricks people into thinking the company is part of the solution, not the problem.
2. Guiltwashing™: Making You Feel Bad
“Guiltwashing” is when companies try to make individuals feel guilty about big problems, shifting the blame onto them. They point people to individual micro actions that actually have little impact on the systemic problem (Concept TM by Whole Whale). This is one of the 4 pillars of Deflection Marketing, tactics include:
- Moralization & Guilt
BP and ExxonMobil try to make you feel guilty for climate change so you won’t blame them for polluting the planet. - Victim Blaming & Shaming
Coca-Cola and Philip Morris blame people for problems like littering or smoking, even though their products and ads helped cause those issues. - False Equivalence (Both-Sidesing)
The sugar industry’s strategy in the 1960s to fund scientific research that downplayed sugar’s health risks and shifted the blame to dietary fats is a classic example of manufactured doubt and false equivalence.
How it works:
Think about litter. For years, campaigns funded by drink and packaging companies focused on shaming “litterbugs” – individuals who litter and promoting ineffectual plastic recycling programs. This ignored the fact that these companies were making more and more throwaway containers that created the litter problem.
Another example is the “carbon footprint.” This idea was heavily promoted by the oil company BP. It encourages people to calculate their personal impact on climate change, making them feel responsible for a crisis largely driven by the fossil fuel industry itself.
Why it’s deflection:
It turns a big, systemic problem caused by industries into a matter of individual failure or morality. If people feel guilty, they might focus on small personal changes instead of demanding bigger changes from the companies causing the harm.
3. Freedom Framing: “It’s Your Choice!”
“Freedom Framing” is when companies fight against rules or regulations (like safety or health rules) by saying these rules take away people’s freedom or choices. They might call the government a “nanny state” for trying to protect people. This is one of the 4 pillars of Deflection Marketing, tactics include:
- Individualization of Responsibility
Companies like Facebook and Google make it seem like protecting your privacy is all up to you, so they don’t have to change their own behavior. - Empowerment Illusion
Apple and Amazon pretend to give you control over your choices, but behind the scenes, they still make the big decisions that affect you. - Micro Action Distraction
Facebook and Google offer little privacy checkboxes and settings to make you feel in control, distracting from how much data they collect no matter what you do.
How it works:
When New York City tried to limit the size of sugary sodas to fight health problems, soda companies argued loudly that this took away consumers’ “freedom to choose” what they drink. They framed it as the government telling people what to do, rather than a health measure. Similarly, tobacco companies fought rules against smoking by calling them attacks on “smoker’s rights” and personal freedom.
Why it’s deflection:
It changes the subject. Instead of talking about whether a product is harmful or polluting, the debate becomes about individual liberty versus government control. This makes it harder to pass rules that might protect people or the environment but could hurt company profits.
4. Sciencewashing: If you can’t find the facts, fund them
“Sciencewashing” is when companies use the language, aesthetics, and institutional authority of science to make misleading or biased claims appear factual and trustworthy. It’s not outright denial of harm—it’s the performance of truth, cloaked in research papers, expert titles, and peer-reviewed illusions.
Sciencewashing is one of the most dangerous forms of Deflection Marketing because it doesn’t just avoid blame—it rewrites reality. This is one of the 4 pillars of Deflection Marketing, tactics include:
Legitimacy Laundering
This is the act of using trusted institutions (like universities, research nonprofits, and medical journals) to give corporate narratives an appearance of objectivity. By funding “independent” studies or quoting credentialed experts on the payroll, companies make biased claims look like scientific consensus.
Example: ExxonMobil’s internal research confirmed climate change in the 1970s, but the company spent decades funding organizations that cast doubt on global warming.
Source – Harvard Climate Accountability Study
Scientific Aesthetic Mimicry
This tactic uses charts, graphs, academic formatting, and complex language to imitate the look and feel of legitimate science. Even if the methodology is weak or the conclusions skewed, the presentation disarms skepticism by looking authoritative.
Example: A candy industry–funded study claimed kids who eat candy are thinner. Despite internal admissions that the data was “clearly padded,” it gained media coverage because it looked like valid science.
Source – NPR / AP
Seed of Truth, Tree of Lies
Corporations often anchor misinformation in a sliver of real data. This small “truth” gives cover for a much larger misrepresentation—allowing marketing claims to sound science-based while distorting the bigger picture.
Example: Pom Wonderful cited antioxidant research in pomegranates to suggest their juice could prevent serious diseases and even “cheat death.” The FTC sued them for false health claims.
Source – FTC Case
How it works:
Sciencewashing weaponizes trust. A citation here, a doctor’s quote there, a graph with decimals—these cues make people lower their guard. It turns real scientific uncertainty into manipulated doubt, and real harm into a debatable opinion.
Why it’s deflection:
Because it appears smart and neutral, sciencewashing makes it hard to argue back. It delays regulations, confuses the public, and lets companies keep harmful systems in place—all while sounding like they’re part of the solution.
Chat with this article concept