GoodHuman, a Marketplace for Sustainable Brands, Finds It's Not Easy to Be Ethical

Francesca Billington

Francesca Billington is a freelance reporter. Prior to that, she was a general assignment reporter for dot.LA and has also reported for KCRW, the Santa Monica Daily Press and local publications in New Jersey. She graduated from Princeton in 2019 with a degree in anthropology.

GoodHuman, a Marketplace for Sustainable Brands, Finds It's Not Easy to Be Ethical

Two months ago, the CEO of a new ecommerce app, GoodHuman, where shoppers can find $95 Allbirds tennis shoes or pick up a set of $118 bamboo sheets, made the tough call to drop the popular clothing brand Reformation from its marketplace of sustainable companies.

The top-selling L.A.-based company — whose slogan reads "Being naked is the #1 most sustainable option. We're #2" — seemed to be a perfect brand for GoodHuman's site, where shoppers are encouraged to "discover all things sustainable and ethical." But the women's eco-conscious brand had taken a hit months earlier after one employee spoke out about a work environment that undermined and mistreated people of color.

Reformation released the results of its internal investigation last month finding its "workplace culture is not 'racist,' as alleged in the social media allegations."

The report didn't change GoodHuman co-founder and CEO James Glasscock's mind.

"We did pull it from curation because we felt like there was some work to be done," Glasscock said. "They've also been a leader in some areas over several years. It's complicated, to be fair."

Those complications, of what exactly is an ethical or sustainable company, are the territory that GoodHuman wants to own. Last week, Glasscock launched the company's app, an Amazon-like store that promises the "largest curated collection of sustainable products from ethical brands."

But figuring out who makes the cut isn't always simple and shows the many pitfalls brands face. GoodHuman isn't the only one doing this. Retailer giant Amazon rolled out its own eco-friendly platform in Europe last year.

GoodHuman determines what brands they sell based on five criteria. The site looks whether a company is certified in things such as fair trade, if it's free of 23 "toxic" ingredients and if the company is transparent. The other two considerations are internal research and, as they call it "community-driven discourse" or opposition by consumers to the brand.

"We think it's difficult for one person, one company to decide what is good for everybody," he said. "I'm not even the right person to decide if it is good or is not good. That's where the community comes in."

That last part is what ultimately triggered Glasscock to pull the popular Reformation.

"Our approach has been if we have to talk about it for too long, then let's just pull it," he said. "There are plenty of ethical and sustainable brands that have a good reputation that many users haven't even heard of."

What's an Ethical Brand?

Glasscock said his approach is "definitely not a perfect solution," but that consumers are seeking guidance in finding brands that align with their values. Some brands on the site sell more expensive products that can take longer to ship, but he said that's not the priority of shoppers that land on his site.

The company, founded in 2019, has so far vetted 680 brands and 50,000 products, which users can scroll through on the discover page under curated headlines like "Fashionably Frugal" and "Wholesome Home."

Glasscock, who spend much of the last decade in entertainment on the distributions side, said the startup has raised $1.2 million to date.

The company relies on the long list of independent bodies scanning brands for how they source materials and the impact of their shipping practices on the environment. Those standards, like Certified Organic and Fair Trade, are stamped on the front of chocolate bars or bagged coffee beans sold in grocery stores. Another is Certified B Corp, the guarantee given last week to L.A.-based organic food seller Thrive Market.

Those certifications have become a key marketing material as consumers become more environmentally conscious. Brands from H&M to McDonalds have embraced the idea of sustainability.

Changing Consumers

Joshua Clark Davis, a professor of history at the University of Baltimore, said businesses are eager to "give the appearance of sustainability," but not all of them fully practice it. In February, he published a book tracking the rise of mission-driven businesses and "conscious capitalism" that began in the 60s and 70s.

"Right now, especially in the age of Trump, people are looking for ways to advance and implement their values," he said. "We've seen how corporations in 2020 are eager to jump on the Black Lives Matter bandwagon, some of them sincerely, some of them less sincerely."

It's reflective of a shift in both consumer and business behavior. But will customers be willing to spend more? Glasscock thinks so. His biggest rival is Amazon.

"We got to make being a good human as convenient as being a bad human," he said. "For us, that means making it as easy as Amazon."

In September, the retail giant rolled out its own shopping platform for vetted eco-friendly products. It launched it in the UK and parts of Europe last. week. With it, Amazon also announced its own certification process, Compact by Design, to encourage companies to make products with less packaging.

"Amazon is a profit-first company," Glasscock said, adding that the move will end up saving Amazon money by lowering shipping costs and fitting more packages into fewer trucks, trains and ships.

"What's it all mean for GoodHuman? Validation of the opportunity for sure," he said. "On one hand we have the most fierce possible competitor a tiny L.A. startup could have. On the other hand, we are more focused on just this and confident we can build a better experience differentiated through curation, authenticity and community. Amazon has many priorities, we have only one."

Subscribe to our newsletter to catch every headline.

Here’s Why Streaming Looks More and More Like Cable

Lon Harris
Lon Harris is a contributor to dot.LA. His work has also appeared on ScreenJunkies, RottenTomatoes and Inside Streaming.
Here’s Why Streaming Looks More and More Like Cable
Evan Xie

The original dream of streaming was all of the content you love, easily accessible on your TV or computer at any time, at a reasonable price. Sadly, Hollywood and Silicon Valley have come together over the last decade or so to recognize that this isn’t really economically viable. Instead, the streaming marketplace is slowly transforming into something approximating Cable Television But Online.

It’s very expensive to make the kinds of shows that generate the kind of enthusiasm and excitement from global audiences that drives the growth of streaming platforms. For every international hit like “Squid Game” or “Money Heist,” Netflix produced dozens of other shows whose titles you have definitely forgotten about.

The marketplace for new TV has become so massively competitive, and the streaming landscape so oversaturated, even relatively popular shows with passionate fanbases that generate real enthusiasm and acclaim from critics often struggle to survive. Disney+ canceled Luscasfilm’s “Willow” after just one season this week, despite being based on a hit Ron Howard film and receiving an 83% critics score on Rotten Tomatoes. Amazon dropped the mystery drama “Three Pines” after one season as well this week, which starred Alfred Molina, also received positive reviews, and is based on a popular series of detective novels.

Even the new season of “The Mandalorian” is off to a sluggish start compared to its previous two Disney+ seasons, and Pedro Pascal is basically the most popular person in America right now.

Now that major players like Netflix, Disney+, and WB Discovery’s HBO Max have entered most of the big international markets, and bombarded consumers there with marketing and promotional efforts, onboarding of new subscribers inevitably has slowed. Combine that with inflation and other economic concerns, and you have a recipe for austerity and belt-tightening among the big streamers that’s virtually guaranteed to turn the smorgasbord of Peak TV into a more conservative a la carte offering. Lots of stuff you like, sure, but in smaller portions.

While Netflix once made its famed billion-dollar mega-deals with top-name creators, now it balks when writer/director Nancy Meyers (“It’s Complicated,” “The Holiday”) asks for $150 million to pay her cast of A-list actors. Her latest romantic comedy will likely move over to Warner Bros., which can open the film in theaters and hopefully recoup Scarlett Johansson and Michael Fassbender’s salaries rather than just spending the money and hoping it lingers longer in the public consciousness than “The Gray Man.”

CNET did the math last month and determined that it’s still cheaper to choose a few subscription streaming services like Netflix and Amazon Prime over a conventional cable TV package by an average of about $30 per month (provided you don’t include the cost of internet service itself). But that means picking and choosing your favorite platforms, as once you start adding all the major offerings out there, the prices add up quickly. (And those are just the biggest services from major Hollywood studios and media companies, let alone smaller, more specialized offerings.) Any kind of cable replacement or live TV streaming platform makes the cost essentially comparable to an old-school cable TV package, around $100 a month or more.

So called FAST, or Free Ad-supported Streaming TV services, have become a popular alternative to paid streaming platforms, with Fox’s Tubi making its first-ever appearance on Nielsen’s monthly platform rankings just last month. (It’s now more popular than the first FAST service to appear on the chart, Paramount Global’s Pluto TV.) According to Nielsen, Tubi now accounts for around 1% of all TV viewing in the US, and its model of 24/7 themed channels supported by semi-frequent ad breaks couldn’t resemble cable television anymore if it tried.

Services like Tubi and Pluto stand to benefit significantly from the new streaming paradigm, and not just from fatigued consumers tired of paying for more content. Cast-off shows and films from bigger streamers like HBO Max often find their way to ad-supported platforms, where they can start bringing in revenue for their original studios and producers. The infamous HBO Max shows like “The Nevers” and “Westworld” that WBD controversially pulled from the HBO Max service can now be found on Tubi or The Roku Channel.

HBO Max’s recently-canceled reality dating series “FBoy Island” has also found a new home, but it’s not on any streaming platform. Season 3 will air on TV’s The CW, along with a new spinoff series called (wait for it) “FGirl Island.” So in at least some ways, “30 Rock” was right: technology really IS cyclical.

As TikTok Faces a Ban, Competitors Prepare to Woo Its User Base

Kristin Snyder

Kristin Snyder is dot.LA's 2022/23 Editorial Fellow. She previously interned with Tiger Oak Media and led the arts section for UCLA's Daily Bruin.

As TikTok Faces a Ban, Competitors Prepare to Woo Its User Base
Evan Xie

This is the web version of dot.LA’s daily newsletter. Sign up to get the latest news on Southern California’s tech, startup and venture capital scene.

Another day, another update in the unending saga that is the potential TikTok ban.

The latest: separate from the various bills proposing a ban, the Biden administration has been in talks with TikTok since September to try and find a solution. Now, having thrown its support behind Senator MarkWarner’s bill, the White House is demanding TikTok’s Chinese parent company, ByteDance, sell its stakes in the company to avoid a ban. This would be a major blow to the business, as TikTok alone is worth between $40 billion and $50 billion—a significant portion of ByteDance’s $220 billion value.

Clearly, TikTok faces an uphill battle as its CEO Shou Zi Chew prepares to testify before the House Energy and Commerce Committee next week. But other social media companies are likely looking forward to seeing their primary competitor go—and are positioning themselves as the best replacement for migrating users.


Last year, The Washington Post reported that Meta paid a consulting firm to plant negative stories about TikTok. Now, Meta is reaping the benefits of TikTok’s downfall, with its shares rising 3% after the White House told TikTok to leave ByteDance. But this initial boost means nothing if the company can’t entice creators and viewers to Instagram and Facebook. And it doesn’t look promising in that regard.

Having waffled between pushing its short-form videos, called Reels, and de-prioritizing them in the algorithm, Instagram announced last week that it would no longer offer monetary bonuses to creators making Reels. This might be because of TikTok’s imminent ban. After all, the program was initially meant to convince TikTok creators to use Instagram—an issue that won’t be as pressing if TikTok users have no choice but to find another platform.


Alternatively, Snap is doing the opposite and luring creators with an ad revenue-sharing program. First launched in 2022, creators are now actively boasting about big earnings from the program, which provides 50% of ad revenue from videos. Snapchat is clearly still trying to win over users with new tech like its OpenAI chatbot, which it launched last month. But it's best bet to woo the TikTok crowd is through its new Sounds features, which suggest audio for different lenses and will match montage videos to a song’s rhythm. Audio clips are crucial to TikTok’s platform, so focusing on integrating songs into content will likely appeal to users looking to recreate that experience.


With its short-form ad revenue-sharing program, YouTube Shorts has already lured over TikTok creators. It's even gotten major stars like Miley Cyrus and Taylor Swift to promote music on Shorts. This is likely where YouTube has the best bet of taking TikTok’s audience. Since TikTok has become deeply intertwined with the music industry, Shorts might be primed to take its spot. And with its new feature that creates compiles all the videos using a specific song, Shorts is likely hoping to capture musicians looking to promote their work.


The most blatant attempt at seducing TikTok users, however, comes from Triller, which launched a portal for people to move their videos from TikTok to its platform. It’s simple, but likely the most effective tactic—and one that other short-form video platforms should try to replicate. With TikTok users worried about losing their backlog of content, this not only lets users archive but also bolsters Triller’s content offerings. The problem, of course, is that Triller isn’t nearly as well known as the other platforms also trying to capture TikTok users. Still, those who are in the know will likely find this option easier than manually re-uploading content to other sites.

It's likely that many of these platforms will see a momentary boost if the TikTok ban goes through. But all of these companies need to ensure that users coming from TikTok actually stay on their platforms. Considering that they have already been upended by one newcomer when TikTok took over, there’s good reason to believe that a new app could come in and swoop up TikTok’s user base. As of right now, it's unclear who will come out on top. But the true loser is the user who has to adhere to the everyday whims of each of these platforms.

We Asked Our Readers How They’re Using AI in a Professional Setting. Here's What They Said

Decerry Donato

Decerry Donato is a reporter at dot.LA. Prior to that, she was an editorial fellow at the company. Decerry received her bachelor's degree in literary journalism from the University of California, Irvine. She continues to write stories to inform the community about issues or events that take place in the L.A. area. On the weekends, she can be found hiking in the Angeles National forest or sifting through racks at your local thrift store.

We Asked Our Readers How They’re Using AI in a Professional Setting. Here's What They Said
Evan Xie

According to Pew Research data, 27% of Americans interact with AI on a daily basis. With the launch of Open AI’s latest language model GPT-4, we asked our readers how they use AI in a professional capacity. Here’s what they told us:

Read moreShow less