Bildekor/a>

I watched "Seduction of Sustainability" with host Janine James about making sustainability more effective, especially by appealing to the nature of supply. The video was effective in that it began with a simple claim "We need to make sustainability more sexy" and proceeded to intersperse simple but convincing facts into a kitsch-y narrative about two products, one sustainable and one not, who fall in love. A large portion of the movie clip focused on their silly cardboard frames and their spoof-y love affair, almost too much. However, the message of sustainability was really driven home when the unsustainable product died prematurely due to its ignorant designer's practices (cheap design, disposable telos, high turnover and excessive packaging). The video commented dismissively on the "demand" side of sustainability (i.e. reduced/altered consumption, energy use, self-sufficiency) by showing one clip of a customer in the store who thoughtlessly purchased both the sustainable and non-sustainable products.
I think this video uses a silly vehicle that might appeal more to consumers, but directs its serious message of design principles to designers and industry. There seems to be a disconnect here; I would expect the industry ("supply" side of the sustainability revolution) representatives to appreciate a more serious, structured business model instead of a metaphorical narrative model. Perhaps the text and the host could have kept the cute narrative and directed their facts about design (30% of landfill volume = packaging waste) to consumers, asking that we purchase the more sustainable products with less packaging and less dangerous manufacturing processes.