• yam天空
  • 天空部落
  • 新聞
  • 寬頻電視
  • 登入 註冊 網誌隨便逛
  • 加入天空部落

網誌 日記 相簿 影音 BlogLive PK吧!
即時新聞 影音新聞 新聞專輯 政治新聞 財經新聞 娛樂新聞 運動新聞 兩岸新聞 科技新聞
免費頻道 隨選戲劇 隨選綜合 大陸電視直播 鎖碼頻道 隨選電影 優惠活動 加入會員
管理介面 發表網誌 發表日記 上傳相片 上傳影音 管理留言
推薦這個部落格: 157

西雅圖凹凸鏡

桂賢的地景及社會觀察

網誌 |留言板
[友情廣告、新書推薦] 《台灣女生 瑞典樂活》 | 主頁 | 氣候暖化的不公平待遇:窮國受害遠大於富國
April 7, 2007
綠色唬爛:我們被廠商的綠行銷術洗腦了嗎?以文找文
kueihsienl 在天空部落發表於13:23:48 | 永續家園行動
鼓勵此網誌:1 
加入書籤: HemiDemiGoogle BookmarksYahoo! My WebDel.icio.usfurltechnorati加入此網頁到:你推我報MyShareUDN共享書籤BlogLive

行銷廣告呈現的大半不是真實,說難聽一點,也非常可能因為沒有「真實」,才需要包裝和化妝。真正對人道及環境有責任的企業,不需要用行銷術來「扭轉」形象,再說難聽一點,許多企業的行銷術不過是騙術,搭著環保綠色順風車,想要扭轉形象繼續賺更多錢的企業,不過是在對消費者做「綠色唬爛」!


近幾年來,無論是在先進或發展中國家,越來越多人意識到包括全球暖化在內的環境危機,永續發展早已是熱門名詞,越來越多號稱環保的科技和產品也如雨後春筍般地大量冒出。與過去兩世紀以來幾乎毫無環保考量的經濟工業活動相較,這樣的趨勢似乎值得欣慰,越來越多大型企業也宣稱要做環保,讓企業變「綠」(不管「綠」這個字的使用是否嚴謹,綠幾乎已經普遍的成為「生態」或「永續」的同義詞,中外皆然)。連惡名昭彰的全球最大零售商沃爾馬(Walmart),居然也提出再生能源以及綠建築賣廠的計畫,搭上了這班綠色順風車;過去許多被認為是破壞環境生態元兇的企業,特別是汽車製造商以及石油公司,居然也開始在電視上大打綠色形象廣告!這些企業真的轉綠了嗎?還是我們被行銷騙術耍了?也許,利用環境危機,打綠色牌會幫企業賺進更多銀子?

這幾年在美國看電視,發現越來越多的企業形象廣告,包括你所能想像的各種汽車品牌、英國石油公司、GE等等都在大玩綠色行銷,那些的廣告非關某個特定產品,而是充滿著各種與產品無關的美好的畫面,不外乎是天真無邪的小孩無憂無慮的玩耍、大人間彼此會心微笑、美麗的森林和山川等等,旁白當然是類似「某某企業重視地球環境與生活品質云云」,企圖讓消費者將企業形象與環保及人類美好的未來連結起來。

當電視上都充斥著向這樣感性的廠商愛地球、愛生態廣告,我們的地球環境真的會向廣告上的那麼美好嗎?你相信這些過去對環境以及人道正義冷酷無情傷害的企業,真的轉綠了嗎?行銷是行銷,廣告是廣告,行銷廣告只負責包裝和化妝,我們畢竟不住在電視的畫面裡,也看不清企業卸妝後的真實面貌。行銷廣告呈現的大半不是真實,說難聽一點,也非常可能因為沒有「真實」,才需要包裝和化妝。真正對人道及環境有責任道義的企業,不需要用行銷術來「扭轉」形象,再說難聽一點,許多企業的行銷術不過是騙術,搭著環保綠色順風車,想要扭轉形象繼續賺更多錢的企業,不過是在對消費者做「綠色唬爛」!

「綠色唬爛」是我對英文「Greenwash」這個字的翻譯。Greenwash是一個新創的英文字,這幾年在網路上越來越多評論者使用這個字,基本上就是指廠商企圖做一些環保,將自己包裝成綠色然後對消費者洗腦,看好消費者的環境意識越來越強烈,越來越願意支持環保行動以及購買相關產品。去年回台灣,朋友告訴我,現在「樂活」這個字在市場上紅遍半邊天,只要產品或服務加上「樂活」二字,消費者似乎比較容易買帳,這「樂活唬爛術」對沒有社會責任的廠商而言,是對無知又想趕流行的消費者的超級吸金器。

當然,也不能一竿子打翻一船人,不是所有廠商都在唬爛,每個廠商在環保上的努力不同,可能有些廠商的確努力地改善他們的產品。科技和產品的改善,當然有助於環境的改善,但我們無法僅僅科技的改善不代表環境的修補,因為許多技術和產品的改善充其量不過是讓環境惡化的速度減緩。如果先進國家已經開發中國家的消費習慣不變,舉個例說,在汽車需求仍然不斷增長,製造即使製造的是所謂比較環保的油電混和車,地球資源終究還是會這些永無止盡的消費和製造耗盡。

無論如何,在廠商越來越精於綠色唬爛和行銷術的年代,我們無法依賴企業的真轉綠或假轉綠來保護生態環境以及自然資源,做為對環境有關鍵影響力的消費者,第一件事就是先改變消費習慣;而作為負責任的消費者,在消費選擇上,至少要精明一點,別被廠商的綠行銷術洗腦了。

 
------------------------------------------

以下轉載兩篇美國商業週刊(Business Week)的相關文章供參考:
網址:http://www.businessweek.com/innovate/content/mar2007/id20070329_693675.htm

 
News & Features March 29, 2007

Are You Being Greenwashed?

The green bandwagon is well and truly rolling. But what's genuine—and what's green spin?

by Sarah Rich

Conscious consumers in the modern marketplace rarely face an either/or proposition. Gone are the days of choosing between pleasure and principle. Gone is the sacrifice of flavour, colour and style in the name of environmental responsibility. With the likely exception of toilet paper (which it seems still cannot be made both recycled and soft), many of our everyday items can now be found in a luxurious shade of green. Savvy advocates of sustainability know that business is not the enemy of the good…

In fact, business can be a vehicle for doing better in the world, and making a comfortable living with a guilt-free conscience as well. But in an increasingly crowded green business sphere, knowing who's authentic presents a challenge. The responsibility for giving not-so-sustainable products a green face—as well as for making truly green products as desirable as their counterparts—lies entirely in the hands of designers, as the make-up artists and storytellers for brands. In a consumer culture teeming with excess and endlessly driving our desire for more stuff, designers become responsible, too, for reconsidering how we engage with products, and how we might transform the consumers' motivation from quantity to quality, and from singular to whole systems thinking.

There are three primary categories into which green-oriented brands fall. The best of them don't craft their identity around sustainability. Their social and environmental characteristics tend to show up as if they are a given in the bigger picture of a current, cutting-edge brand; because the reality is that a lack of awareness around these issues equates to a lack of viability in the twenty-first century. A second category comprises campaigns that do direct their messaging squarely on green, but intentionally incorporate an urban edge and a modern aesthetic in order to combat the stereotype of something four decades too tired. Finally, there are those brands that aggressively present an "eco" image as a way to capitalise on the green consumer movement without matching their practices to their pretence. This "greenwashing" trend has fairly well permeated the industry and it's now up to consumers to develop a radar for spotting duplicitous brands. As a New York Times article on greenwashing put it, "When a trend starts to show success, it's a design pile-up…[But] merely dressing up the package is not enough. There is value in telling a story, but it must be true." Companies whose story is real, compelling, and smartly designed are the ones who are starting to shine.

Then there is another category, which transcends or stands peripheral to the others, and may represent the direction green consumption is headed. It's design for the elimination of excess—dematerialisation—in which user experience takes precedence over acquiring more things. Product service systems, or service designs, reconceive goods as functions and permit users to obtain access to the outcome yielded by a product without actually owning it, meaning each of us needs to consume less in order to get the same result. The concept has taken hold well in the —perhaps better than anywhere else in the world—where sharing of commodities such as cars, office space and power tools has become relatively commonplace.

An inventive group of students from Cologne recently developed an even deeper interpretation of the system, called Wir Hier Service Group. After researching what kinds of things consumers generally take for granted, Wir Hier's designers ascertained that a successful service system would approach "mind redesign" by offering interlinked sets of services rather than discreet programmes. Wir Hier already has around 30 service systems in place. The systems themselves serve as a marketing tool for the company, which brands its programmes heavily, allowing the meme to spread virally as a result of the enhanced community interaction the services foster. For example, their "Tea-4-Two" programme dropped branded tea bags in community mailboxes, with a location, date and time printed on them. At the designated meeting place, neighbours would share tea and get to know one another. This kind of branded service preserves the value and profitability of the entity that creates it, while fundamentally transforming what the users seek, and what they gain by engaging with the product. Wir Hier dematerialises the structure for consumption, and strips it down to pure experience.

Somewhere in between the material and immaterial product lies a new niche that straddles the gap. One player emerging at that junction is Nau, an apparel company out of Portland, Oregon, whose updated take on classically "crunchy" outdoor clothing merges urban cuts with a socially and environmentally conscious corporate mission (see BusinessWeek.com, 1/30/07, Retail 2.0). The apparel collections themselves do push gently on the envelope of outdoor style, but where Nau has really innovated is on the design of their retail space, which they don't call a "store", but rather a Webfront.

At a Nau Webfront, one sample of every piece in the collection and every available size hangs ready for visiting customers to try on. But the company encourages shoppers to use the Webfront just as a testing platform for the clothes, and to then make their purchases online at computer kiosks located on-site, then take delivery at home. By running retail this way, Nau dramatically decreases the regular inventory required at its multiple physical locations, thereby reducing the impacts of freight and lengthy supply chains. In order to help this experimental model fly, they've applied design strategy to strengthening their web presence, which will be a key component of their Webfront success. Nau has run several innovative multi-media online campaigns, including a low-budget web documentary about a woman living in a compact, off-grid mobile dwelling, crossing rural, suburban and urban divides and sharing her observations. The video had a feverish viral run on the net, reaching half a million eyes in a single day.

But it can't all disappear. Nau may encourage customers to buy fewer, more versatile and longer-lasting clothes, but they still sell clothes. And we will always need clothes, just as we'll need toilet paper and food, shoes and vehicles, and plenty of other furnishings for our comfort and wellbeing. So the question every green company and designer now aims to answer is, "Can we have our cake and eat it, too?" And the answer is yes.

Take Terra Plana, the British footwear company that makes trainers out of recycled uniforms, sport jackets, rubber tires and used denim. The shoes have a distinct design that pinpoints all the characteristics of a hip, young, urban target market, and like the best of these emerging green companies, Terra Plana's product would be desirable on style alone, even if it lacked an ecological agenda. But its value escalates on account of the company's commitment to sustainable materials and social responsibility. They've designed a series of icons that communicate the various details of the shoe and its production process. A similar effort was undertaken by Timberland, the less stylish but much bigger footwear company that recently began printing "nutrition labels" on their shoe boxes, which provide calculations of the energy required to manufacture the shoes, the materials they contain, and other impact-related information. While it may be more of a brand-beautifying gesture than a truly useful display, it represents their attention to shifting consumer priorities.

But how do we distinguish between gestures towards responsibility and practical transformation? How does a designer know if they are just painting a face on an idealistic idea, or applying aesthetics to a substantive and sincere brand? There's no easy answer, but there are designers out there who've made it their business to learn the back story of well-branded companies, and subsequently developed compelling campaigns from what they've learned.

Background Stories emerged from designer Arlene Birt's research at Design Academy Eindhoven in the . It's an early concept using graphic design to tell the story of chocolate production for a variety of different brands. The theory Birt addresses is "context connection"—a fairly self-explanatory name for the process of helping consumers establish an understanding of the bigger picture from which their products come. By using well-designed, brand-aligned graphics on the inside of the packaging, the education arrives in the consumer's hand in a simple, digestible form. To deepen the mini-lesson on the wrapper, an affiliated website provides clickable pop-up details on each element of the illustration that will link you even further, to resource pages on drying and fermentation processes, and even the websites of the shipping and trucking companies who transport the ingredients to the factory. So far Birt has designed concept labels for Dagoba, Green & Black, and Hershey's. Dagoba, which is branded (and began) as a small, chocolatier with a conscience, is actually owned by Hershey; and Green & Black, which has as similar identity as a high-end, fair-trade brand, was acquired by Cadbury Schweppes several years ago. But Birt doesn't use her skills to expose or defame corporations; this is constructive design activism. Through visual storytelling and extensive resource offerings, Birt builds an accessible education for the skyrocketing population of consumers who want to indulge without feeling guilty. What better launch pad than chocolate for demonstrating that decadence and diligence can go hand in hand?

Brands can design all manner of slick packaging and alluring ads, but in order to achieve credibility, they have to deliver transparency with every product and interaction. The conscious consumer wants to know what's in her cake before she eats it. Creatives and designers face the challenge of telling the true story behind a brand in a way that's sincere, engaging and reassuring so that green business can thrive and the bar can keep rising on what sustainability means in the market.

Sarah Rich is a writer and editor working where sustainability intersects with design, branding and consumer culture. She is the managing editor of Worldchanging.com, and co-editor/co-author of Worldchanging: A User's Guide for the 21st Century (Abrams).

------------------------------------------------------------------

另外,以下這篇文章也值得參考:

When corporate 'greening' chafes environmentalists By Caroline McCarthy
CNET News.com
March 29, 2007, 4:00 AM
Published: March 29, 2007

http://news.com.com/When+corporate+greening+chafes+environmentalists/2100-11746_3-6171445.html


誰推薦這篇文章:
留言 (7) | 引用 (0) | 人氣 () | 轉寄
此分類上一篇:小心綠色唬爛 | 主頁 | 此分類下一篇:氣候暖化的不公平待遇:窮國受害遠大於富國
相關閱讀
引用 (你可以針對此文寫一篇屬於自己的blog/想法,並給作者一個通告)
引用
留言 (7筆)
7.
Hello 版主,

你這篇文章給我很大的啟示,我想轉寄給更多好友,
你提到"Greenwash",讓我想對最近國內炒的很熱得"CSR"
企業社會責任,感覺也是假設社會責任之名,行行銷之實,
最後,感謝你本篇文章.

BEST REGARDS

Ben
板主回覆:
謝謝你的留言,很高興文章對你有啟示,歡迎轉寄。在這個大家趕賺「綠金」的時代,消費者真該好好睜大眼,別被假環保的廠商唬弄了。
Ben 於 2007-06-20 09:01:57 留言 |

6.
我是國內的小小研究生
正在撰寫綠色行銷的相關研究
雖然研究生對於學術或是實務的貢獻的能見度很低
但是在看完kueihsienl這篇後
我想我會在結果部份引用商週這篇的概念或是想法
讓他成為國內綠色行銷研究的一部份滴
板主回覆:
Hi Myed, 謝謝你的留言。雖然我不太瞭解「綠色行銷」的真正內涵,不過希望你的研究能夠對促進真正的永續發展和環境保護有貢獻!加油!
Myed 於 2007-05-14 14:37:49 留言 |

5.
拍拍手
高爾的功大於過,我是因為高爾的影片而找來貴部落。

基本上沒有所謂綠色商品
天下沒有不耗能的商品

只要有生產就有能源資源消耗問題

唯一途徑就是「緩慢」
旅遊定點散心、消耗很緩、生活步調很緩
降低消費速度、降低物質需求、
讓爆漲的能源與資源消耗降低

唯一途徑不是替代能源的尋求

而是資本主義全面檢討。人類幸福跟物質享樂關係的重新定義。

本來我是自由資本的擁護者,
全球化要讓全球資本像水一樣自由流動,打通各關卡。
我在這裡卻看到買東西要捨遠求近,不浪費運輸耗能。各地區盡可能就近取材吸取養分、就近消費。這點著眼地域化跟全球化完全背道。
勞動生產方式將會在不遠的未來再度抬頭。因為生產速度的污染處理成本會壓制工業快速生產。
板主回覆:
謝謝你分享你的想法,對於你的說法我再贊成也不過:唯一途徑就是「緩慢」,把速度放慢下來,人類一直盲目的追求「發展」,資本主義讓部分人的物質生活品質提升,但也造成了部分人的不公義。
希望以後經常看到你來這裡分享你的想法喔!
flashpai 於 2007-04-29 15:46:46 留言 |

4.
"畢竟他並沒有因為他對全球暖化的宣傳和教育而得到選票或暴利...."

Well, may jump conclusion too early, better wait and see.

"以下轉載兩篇美國商業週刊(Business Week)的相關文章供參考:
網址:http://www.businessweek.com/innovate/content/mar2007/id20070329_69"

Perhaps, you unconsciously 替美國商業週刊打了形象廣告. Enterprises like most of the oral free 廣告.

I dare to say if you have time, may trace where the 美國商業週刊 business sponsorship comes from, is 美國商業週刊 branch of the time-warner media company or others? In business world, public trust is the biggest asset of enterprise. Enterprises won't sacrifice their profit in order to 真正對人道及環境有責任, because there are wall street behind them, and the majority of investors want to have yearly good return from the company they invest, or their money move away in a click of finger at nonasecond.
板主回覆:
Thanks for your message. You are obsolutely right: I might jump to a conclusion too soon; afterall, I don't Know Al Gore that well. I guess my real point is that I don't consider what Al Gore is doing (educating the public about Global Warming) is greenwashing. I believe what he is talking about is true, at least I firmly believe it.

You are also right that I might accidentally did some free marketing for the Business Week. The is quite ironic for me because I normally do not trust business magazine like this including 天下、遠見 which over the years keep promoting the "successfull images" of big enterprises.

I don't believe any big enterprise can actually do any really good to the environment in the long term for several reasons: a) they are greedy in their nature (greed is the foundamental requirement for a small business to become big), greed can never go with sustainability; B) They are mostly responsible for screwing up the global environmment (culturally and ecologically) in the first place!

Again, thanks for sharing your thoughts!
ws 於 2007-04-16 11:41:36 留言 |

3.
呵 那前美國副總統高爾一定是此道高手
他出資的那部不願面對的真相得到奧斯卡最佳紀錄片
他現在也儼然變成環保人士的意見領袖
但他跟他老婆兩人住的豪宅,被踢爆用電量
是美國家庭平均用電量20倍
一年電費高達3萬美元
板主回覆:
這事情讓我感覺很遺憾,有很多值得討論的面向,
不過我不認為高爾是在對我們做綠色唬爛,
畢竟他並沒有因為他對全球暖化的宣傳和教育而得到選票或暴利
hung 於 2007-04-07 22:06:25 留言 |

2.
綠色唬爛

也提供一個綠色唬爛消息.
GM通用汽車在90年代做了電動車. 花了幾億USD研究, 製造.
加州人愛死它們了, 最後通用汽車通通送它們到垃圾場肢解.

真瞎...
http://big5.xinhuanet.com/gate/big5/news.xinhuanet.com/auto/2002-11/22/content_637629.htm
板主回覆:
通用汽車的這個事件,是一個值得討論的議題,背後有龐大的社會結構造成電動車的回收肢解,事實上,這整個事件也拍成了紀錄片,請參考:
http://blog.yam.com/kueihsienl/article/8363050
kevin296 於 2007-04-07 21:24:08 留言 |

1.
凹凸鏡照了好一陣子, 綠色唬爛讓我不得不浮出水面擊掌叫好!
板主回覆:
哈!謝謝你浮出水面的鼓勵!
gava 於 2007-04-07 16:10:50 留言 |

發表你的留言 (字數限制 最多 2000 個中文字)
私密留言: 是 否
Name:





是 否
內容:
系統公告
  • [活動] 快來尋找飛俠蹤跡,讓你輕鬆登上天空首頁
桂賢的新書,請多多指教!
好城市
個人檔案
個人圖檔
ID:kueihsienl
暱稱:桂賢
地區:北美洲
  • 訂閱 |
    • 我要訂閱此部落格的
    • 日記
    • 網誌
    • 相簿
  • 好友 |
    • 好友功能
    • 觀看好友列表
    • 觀看人緣列表
  • 人氣 |
  • 簡介 

人氣指數
當日人次:
累積人次:
文章分類
  • 目錄 (13)
  • 凹凸鏡佈告欄 (19)
  • 空間設計與城鄉規劃 (84)
  • 環境生態 (39)
  • 永續家園行動 (46)
  • 西雅圖的故事 (44)
  • 社會文化觀察 (62)
  • 異國旅人手札 (65)
  • 美加探索札記 (20)
  • 水患課題 (16)
  • 美濃 (5)
  • 求學工作與生活雜記 (36)
  • 從世界看台灣 (5)
  • 私房推薦 (30)
kueihsienl的最新的回應
  • shane:
    大陆的朋友什么时候可以...
  • jack7218:
    私密留言
  • jfd1950:
    大大您好: ...
  • 燕如:
    http://tw.k...
  • 嫦娥:
    私密留言
讀者從哪裡來?
Locations of visitors to this page
黑米
我的讀書筆記
  • 生態城市‧都市水文
非常用心的好站

全國環境行事曆

[連結] 地景 / 建築
  • European Prize for Uban Public Space
  • European Archive of Urban Public Space
[連結] 永續課題
  • Environment for Europeans
  • Word Changing
  • Fragile Earth
  • People and Place: Ideas that Connect Us
  • Resilience Science
  • Open the Future
[連結] 永續設計
  • Low Impact Development Center
  • Ecocity Builders
  • US Green Building Council
  • Green Infrastructure
  • SOLTAG energy housing
  • Better Bricks
[連結] 規劃設計組織
  • The Buckminster Fuller Institute
  • Participatory Community Design in the Pacific Rim
  • National Association for Olmsted Parks
  • Holcim Foundation for Sustainable Construction
  • The Cultural Landscape Foundation
  • Urban Land Institute
[連結] 規劃設計雜誌
  • Harvard Design Magazine
  • TOPOS
  • Inhabitat
  • Tree Hugger
  • Land+Living
  • Daylight & Architecture magazine by VELUX
[連結] 水患管理
  • Polders - The Scene of Land and Water
  • EU Flood Risk Management
[連結] 國外的民間力量
  • People's Waterfront Coalition
  • Center for Law in the Public Interest
[連結] 台灣的民間力量
  • 公共電視「我們的島」
  • 環境資訊中心
  • 台灣綠黨
  • 台灣環境行動網
  • 美濃愛鄉協進會
  • 搶救福隆沙灘
  • 南方電子報
  • 台灣綠色公民行動聯盟
  • 淡水河守護聯盟
  • 治水監督聯盟
  • 低碳生活部落格
  • 我的一畝田
  • 小地方新聞網
  • 苦勞網
  • 美濃農村田野學會
  • 野上野下
[連結] 電影 / 紀錄片
  • An Inconvenient Truth
  • Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room
  • Oil on Ice
  • Fear and Trembling
  • The March of the Penguins
  • Supersize me
  • Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price
  • The Corporation
  • Grizzly Man
  • Emmanuel's Gift
  • Next Industrial Revolution
  • Ecological Design: Inventing the Future
  • 榖子‧榖子
  • 南方澳海洋紀事
  • Who Killed the Electric Car
  • Street Fight
  • 練習曲 Island Etude
  • Drowned Out 滅頂家園
  • Darwin's Nightmare
  • 河口人
  • The 11th Hour
  • Guns, Germs & Steel
  • Planet Earth
  • When the Levees Broke
  • What would Jesus Buy?
  • The Kite Runner
  • Sicko
  • Arctic Tale
  • Oil + Water
  • RiverWebs
  • River Ways
  • The Carbon Connection
  • Fast Food Nation
  • T-Shirt Travels
  • Up the YangTze
  • FLOW
  • Darbareye Elly
  • Food, Inc.
[連結] 綠色生活
  • The Green Guide
  • Green Roofs for Healthy Cities
  • 主婦聯盟生活消費合作社
  • EarthSave
  • Seattle EcoMetro
[連結] 朋友的部落格
  • 鐵蛋魚酥雜貨舖
  • 瑞典小丸子
  • 江彥生的學術網站
  • 爬天梯
  • 游離在海洋與城市之間
  • 蔚藍手札
  • 北歐四季透明筆記
  • 美濃菸酒會
  • Orange Town
  • 台灣雜燴: Tawain COMBO
  • Jellyfishing State
  • 老得太快,聰明得太遲
  • et dansk eventyr…
  • Clio & Sonya 的異想世界
  • 邱銘源的自然野簿
  • 林祖媽哇欸天空
  • 印地安娜旅外生活
  • 環境的自辯
  • Explore Drawing & Painting
  • 誰來趕走雨季?
誰推薦我
誰來我家
拿來增加效果的東西
搜尋此頻道內容
搜尋:
RSS 訂閱
RSS2
ATOM
贊助商
其它資訊
本部落所刊登之內容,皆由作者個人所提供,不代表 yam 天空 本身立場。
POWERED BY
POWERED BY 天空部落
會員登入│免費註冊