g Johnson&Johnson Impact.

Key finding: Verification without accountability

• J&J earned the strongest third-party credentials in this dataset which is an A- carbon disclosure grade (CDP). Science Based Target initiatives (SBTi) validated climate targets and sign-off from two independent auditing firms.

  • However, J&J left out the two things a consumer might actually want to know.

• J&J excluded its talc and asbestos litigation from sustainability communications entirely. This is a case that produced one of the largest corporate settlements in US history. It also omitted its multi-billion dollar federal opioid settlements.

• The S in ESG stands for Social. This is product safety and consumer harm which calls for corporate accountability.

  • J&J's talc and asbestos litigation produced one of the largest corporate settlements in US history. Federal courts scrutinized it. Allegations named J&J as knowingly selling a product linked to cancer which was largely to mothers using it on their babies. J&J left it out of its sustainability report entirely.

• My framework's Omission of Material Controversies indicator doesn't ask whether a controversy is environmental. It asks whether a company excluded something the public record already confirmed. The talc litigation clears that bar.

• To be ultra clear, this isn't about whether talc is green. It's about whether J&J is honest about its ESG endeavors.

• J&J chose what to give the auditors. That's not a verification gap, J&J simply lacks full accountability.