Why Public Inc. Thinks Brands Need To Talk About Impact More Clearly
2026 Conscious Consumer Report | Public Inc.
For a long time, brands have been told the same story. Consumers care about sustainability. They care about ethics. They care about social impact. And if a company is doing the right thing, people will reward it.
Phillip Haid is not so sure it is that simple.
Haid is the CEO of Public Inc., an independent creative impact agency that works across North America. The company helps brands and nonprofits with impact strategy, sustainability communications and issue-led campaigns. Its clients include Macy’s, Samsonite Global, CeraVe, Dick’s Sporting Goods and Meals on Wheels America.
But Haid’s latest focus is not on what brands want to say. It is on what consumers actually understand.
That is the thinking behind Public Inc.’s latest Conscious Consumer Report, which looks at the gap between what people say they care about and what they actually do when they shop.
“There was a lot of research over the years that would say consumers will pay more and will do more for companies that are doing the right things,” Haid said. “But as a practitioner working with companies and nonprofits, it just wasn’t our experience.”
That gap became the starting point for the report. Public Inc. wanted to look past broad claims and get closer to real behavior. So instead of simply asking people what they believe, the team asked something more practical — across 20 purchases, how often do they actually make a conscious choice?
The answers were more encouraging than Haid expected.
Last year, Public Inc. found that 38 percent of people could be described as conscious consumers. This year, that number rose to 40 percent. That may not sound dramatic, but in a period marked by inflation, affordability pressure and growing backlash around purpose-driven messaging, it stood out.
“We expected the index of conscious consumerism to go down, it actually went up,” Haid said.
That finding matters because many brands have started pulling back. Some worry consumers no longer care. Others assume that talking about impact has become too risky. Haid believes the report suggests otherwise.
“What we have found is that’s just not the case because the demand from consumers and employees is still high,” he said. “It’s like between 65 and 70 percent want this.”
The problem, he argues, is not that people have stopped caring. It is that brands are often explaining these issues badly.
Phil Haid, CEO of Public Inc. | Public Inc.
Consumers are not tuning out. They are getting lost
The clearest finding in the report is also the most useful. When people do not make a conscious choice, it is often not because they reject the idea. It is because they do not understand the claim.
“The biggest reason why people wouldn’t make a conscious choice was actually confusion,” Haid said. “They didn’t know what the stuff was telling them.”
That confusion showed up across the study. Public Inc. found that 87 percent of consumers dropped off from making a conscious choice because of claim confusion.
It is easy to see why. A lot of impact language makes sense inside a company but not in everyday life. Carbon reduction, regenerative agriculture, sustainability claims — these phrases may sound important, but they often ask too much of the shopper. People are busy. They are distracted. They are making quick decisions.
As Haid put it, “People talk about carbon reduction, like how much is a good carbon reduction? People had no idea.”
That is the heart of the problem. Brands often assume that because a message is true, it is also clear. But those are not the same thing.
Why “me now” works better than “we later”
This is where the report becomes especially useful.
Haid said many brands still talk about impact in terms of the bigger collective good. They focus on future benefits — stronger communities, less waste, a healthier planet. Those things matter, but they can feel far away.
Public Inc.’s research found that messages work better when they show the immediate benefit to the consumer.
“It’s about me, what’s good for me now, not we later,” Haid said.
That shift helped shape this year’s testing. Public Inc. looked at how different claims performed when they were rewritten in a more direct, human way.
A renewable energy message became “cleaner air you breathe.” That produced a 6 percent lift in purchase intent. A regenerative farming claim became “more nutrition in every bite.” A packaging message shifted from less waste to “less packaging, less hassle.”
Each one did the same thing. It made the benefit easier to understand. It brought the message closer to daily life.
“All of these things outperformed going to a claim that’s just about the collective benefit,” Haid said.
This does not mean people only care about themselves. It means that brands need to connect the big idea to something real. If the message feels vague or distant, it is easy to ignore. If it feels clear and useful, it has a better chance of sticking.
2026 Conscious Consumer report | Public Inc.
The political story is not what many brands think
Another finding in the report pushes back on a common assumption.
Public Inc. found that the difference between Republican and Democrat consumers was very small when it came to conscious consumer behavior.
“The gap between a Republican and Democrat in terms of conscious consumer was negligible,” Haid said.
That does not mean every issue is neutral, or that brands should jump into every divisive debate. But it does suggest that many companies are working from an oversimplified view of who cares about impact.
Haid’s point is that relevance matters more than labels. If a message clearly explains why something is better for you or your family, it can resonate across political lines.
The report also found a trust issue. Consumers may want brands to share this kind of information, but they do not always trust it when it appears only on corporate channels.
“There’s a bit of a trust gap,” Haid said.
In other words, better messaging matters, but so does where people encounter it. If brands want these claims to feel believable, they need to show up in more than one place.
A better way to talk about purpose and impact
What makes this report useful is that it offers something more practical than the usual purpose debate.
Too often, these conversations get stuck at the level of slogans. One side says purpose is dead. The other insists consumers still care. Haid is offering something more grounded. Yes, people still care. But brands are losing them with language that is vague, abstract and hard to trust.
“Usually these reports tell you about what doesn’t work,” Haid said. “They don’t tell you about what does work.”
That is what Public Inc. is trying to do here.
“You do not have to stay quiet in this market,” Haid said. “You just need to know how to do it.”
That may be the real lesson for brands right now. The audience is still there. The interest is still there. But good intentions are not enough. If companies want people to act, they have to stop sounding like a report and start sounding like something a real person can understand.
At Conspiracy of Love, we help changemakers tell their most powerful stories — stories that inspire action, build movements, and create lasting impact.
Find out more about our Values-Driven Storytelling and GPS to Purpose workshops, and how we can help you scale your impact.
