[Green Inc.](http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/) sort of [recognizes](http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/05/language-watchdog-is-fed-up-with-green/) some irony in the name of their blog.
> Do blogs like Green Inc. (and its predecessor, T[he Business of Green](http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/23/on-the-color-of-money/)) have something to answer for?
> People and companies employing the word “green” in environmental contexts are guilty of “mis-use, over-use, general uselessness,” according to Lake Superior State University in Michigan, which last week unveiled its results from an [annual survey](http://www.lssu.edu/banished/) – it’s 34th – of words that should be banished.
> “Environmental buzzwords are getting the axe this year,” the university said in a statement. “‘Green’ and ‘going green’ received the most nominations,” the university announced on New Year’s Eve. . .
> Valerie Gilson, a commenter from Gales Ferry, Conn., added: “I’m all for being environmentally responsible, but this ‘green’ needs to be nipped in the bud.”
This is the second article pointing to the dangers of overuse of a word I spotted in the last few days. See my earlier [post](http://www.johnehrenfeld.com/2009/01/is-sustainability-becoming-ano.html#comments).