I don't think the environmental issue should be dismissed so easily.

What is the "environmentally friendly" paper that marketing inserts are made from? Paper made from wood pulp that comes from sustainable forests? The same forests that are thought to have only 25% of the biomass of old natural growth forests that they replace? Wildlife habitats are being destroyed for this "environmentally friendly" paper.

I can and do recycle these unsolicited marketing inserts. But does everyone? The following information comes from wasteonline.org.uk:

"In 2002/03, paper and card accounted for over a third of all household waste collected for recycling, with 1.1 million tonnes being collected in England. This means however that around 5 million tonnes of household paper and card is not recycled and is largely going to landfill."

"Paper is a biodegradable material. This means that when it goes to landfill, as it rots, it produces methane, which is a potent greenhouse gas (20 times more potent than carbon dioxide)."

I find this very concerning as greenhouse gases contribute to global warming. Even if you don't believe in global warming, you have to conceed that we must reduce the amount of waste going to landfill, if only because we are running out of suitable sites for landfill.  More from wasteonline.org.uk:

"The UK government has developed this theme to produce a "waste hierarchy" - a system that shows us the order of preference for dealing with our waste.

Reduce 
Reuse 
Recover (recycle, compost, energy recovery) 
Dispose "

I would like to see CILIP help us to reduce the waste. After all, that is the government's prefered way for us to deal with our waste!! 

I agree that this thread is relevant to our profession as it is a matter of what we would like our professional organisation to do for us. Do we want CILIP to keep our subs down by taking money from marketing inserts? Or should they be choosy about which marketing inserts they distribute, accepting only those that do not contribute to our stereotype? Or only those that are professionally relevant? Or do we want CILIP to stand by certain principles on the environment and not accept any inserts? 

If CILIP are not making any money from these inserts, then certainly they should not accept any more.

Jen

Jenny Delasalle
Service Innovation Officer
Research and Innovation Unit
http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/services/library/subjects/riu/

University of Warwick Library
Gibbet Hill Road
Coventry, CV4 7AL
Tel: +44 (0)24 765 75793 

>>> [log in to unmask] 05/12/05 09:33am >>>
At the risk of prolonging this thread even further beyond its natural life,
I am surprised by the level of ignorance of marketing and how it works shown
by some of the postings about the David Nieper insert. Companies use inserts
as a marketing tool because they work, and the return on their investment
makes it worth their while. Companies monitor the relative effectiveness of
each aspect of the marketing mix they use and they do more of what works,
and less of what doesn't't. I would guess that this company uses inserts in
other professional periodicals and are successful with it.  They don't use,
for example TV advertising, because that doesn't work for them. In fact some
posters to the thread say they are familiar with the product and have bought
it in the past, which suggests that David Nieper have got their targeting
right.

There are two reasons why this matters to us.

CILIP continues to be under pressure as far as subs is concerned and should
therefore explore all reasonable avenues to optimise its income, and if the
Gazette can pay for itself through advertising, I don't see the problem. For
those worried about environmental issues, most marketing agencies who use
large amounts of paper, use environmentally friendly papers, and of course
you can recycle any paper that you no longer need. Most of the people who
complained about inserts do buy (and presumably do not keep indefinitely)
the newspapers and magazines that include them.

Other recent topics on this list, such as Faking It, imply that as
profession we are really poor at marketing ourselves. Libraries and
information units get closed, people lose their jobs, and this is a poorly
paid profession because we don't market ourselves and what we do
effectively. So we should stop being precious about marketing and how it
works. We must get to understand it and exploit it, rather than regarding
ourselves as somehow above all that.


Diana Nutting
Information Liaison Manager
Business Link for London
Link House
292-308 Southbury Road
Enfield EN1 1TS
> *  020 8443 7229
> * [log in to unmask] 
www.businesslink4london.com 
Winners of Best Information or Knowledge Team in a Business Environment -
International Information Industry Awards 2004.




---
Employment law changes 2005 - make sure you comply
Visit http://www.businesslink4london.com to find out more
Winner: Most effective public sector website 2004

This email has been scanned for viruses at Business Link for London