Advertisers Need the Full Picture: Why Environmental Change in Media requires Dual Disclosure.

We love data in this industry, but on the most critical metric of all - our climate impact - we’re settling for an incomplete picture. 

Within our industry, some perceive carbon accounting allocation methods (Location vs. Market-Based Approaches) as interchangeable. While the GMSF mandates a location-based approach for estimating power consumption emissions, both methods are, in fact, indispensable.

To fully understand the impact of our media choices and our mitigation efforts, dual reporting should be the standard for all media owners. We must move beyond the practice of choosing one approach over another for competitive or commercial gain, and instead, demand a like for like comparison to support making truly informed and responsible decisions.

Each method provides a vital insight, so let’s clarify what each approach reveals.

First, the location-based method. This gives us the undiluted, physical truth of an asset’s carbon footprint. This number is a product of two simple but critical factors: the carbon intensity of the local electricity grid it’s plugged into, and the raw energy the advertising asset itself consumes. This second point is crucial and often overlooked. It means we can finally distinguish between an energy-efficient, modern digital screen and an outdated, power-guzzling one, even if they are on the same street. It provides a true benchmark of an asset’s operational efficiency in its specific environment.

Then, you have the market-based method. This is the action metric. It reflects the conscious choices a media owner makes to take responsibility for its impact, primarily by purchasing Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs). But crucially, when viewed in isolation, it tells you nothing about that underlying energy efficiency. An operator can use this method to report a ‘net zero’ impact for an incredibly inefficient asset, effectively masking the real problem of high energy consumption.

Seeing them as interchangeable alternatives is where we go wrong. The real power comes from seeing them side-by-side. Dual reporting pulls back the curtain. It allows a media planner or brand to ask two fundamental questions:

1. What is the true physical carbon cost of this media placement, reflecting both its location and its energy efficiency? (The location-based figure gives you this answer).

2. And what is this media owner actively doing to compensate for that impact? (The market-based figure tells you that story).

This approach gives us a richer, more honest understanding across all media channels. For an out-of-home provider, we can compare the energy performance of one digital billboard against another. For a publisher, we can assess the efficiency of their printing presses. For a broadcaster, we see the real energy demand of their infrastructure.

This isn’t about finding a single number to crown the “greenest” channel. It’s about creating a transparent marketplace that drives two types of positive change simultaneously. It rewards media owners who not only operate in lower-carbon grids but also those who invest in energy-efficient technology. It shines a light on who is truly innovating versus who is simply writing cheques to cover up an inefficient operation.

The conversation becomes more sophisticated. We move from a simple "who is better?" to a more insightful "what is the asset's real-world impact, and what is the demonstrated commitment to progress?"

The time for hiding inefficiency behind a single metric is over. As brands and agencies, we must start demanding both figures from our media partners. And as media owners, providing this complete picture should be standard practice - a testament to transparency and a true commitment to both operational excellence and environmental responsibility.

Let's equip ourselves with all the information. By demanding dual reporting as our industry’s baseline, we empower everyone to make smarter choices, recognise genuine innovation, and drive the entire Australian media landscape toward a truly decarbonised future.

About Net Zero Media:

At Net Zero Media, we are driving a future where the advertising industry takes decisive action to reduce its carbon emissions. 

Recognising the critical need for specialised technology to measure these Scope 3 emissions, Net Zero Media was founded by a collaboration of senior executives from the marketing, advertising, software and sustainability industries who developed CarboniQ to accurately measure the environmental impact of every advertising campaign across all media channels.

Our mission is to transform the advertising landscape by integrating media planning expertise with advanced technology and a deep understanding of climate science. We empower the industry to navigate complex challenges and deliver sustainable solutions, driving decarbonisation.