Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) reporting has become an increasingly important part of the corporate landscape, particularly as businesses face growing expectations from regulators, investors, consumers and society.

Yet despite the growing volume of ESG disclosures, the subject remains difficult for many people to understand. Much of the language surrounding ESG continues to be highly technical, designed primarily for boardrooms, strategic management teams, sustainability professionals and investors.

This raises an important question: if ESG is ultimately about how businesses affect the environment, people and society, why is the conversation still so difficult for the public to understand?

The answer may lie partly in the way ESG information is communicated. Companies are increasingly producing detailed sustainability and ESG reports containing emissions data, climate targets, supply-chain information, social indicators, governance disclosures and risk assessments. These reports are important for accountability and decision-making, but they are not necessarily written for the ordinary reader.

This is where the media can play a much larger role.

News organisations can act as a bridge between complex corporate disclosures and the wider public. Rather than simply reporting that a company has announced a new sustainability target, journalists can explain what that target means, why it matters, how it will be measured and whether there is credible evidence behind it. The objective is not to oversimplify ESG, but to make it understandable without losing its substance.

For example, when a company reports a reduction in carbon emissions, an investor may immediately consider the potential impact on long-term financial performance. A member of the public, however, may simply want to know what the reduction actually means and whether it has made a meaningful difference. Both perspectives are valid, but they require different forms of communication.

The same applies to the social dimension of ESG. Workplace safety, employee wellbeing, diversity, human rights, wages and community impact are often presented through corporate policies and performance indicators. Yet behind those indicators are real people. The media can bring those issues into context by examining how corporate commitments are experienced by employees, communities and consumers.

Governance is another area where media scrutiny is particularly important. Corporate governance can involve complex issues such as board composition, executive remuneration, risk management, anti-corruption measures and accountability. These subjects may appear distant from everyday life, but governance failures can have significant consequences for employees, investors, customers and communities.

The media therefore has a responsibility not only to report what companies say about governance, but also to ask whether governance systems are working in practice.

This becomes particularly important as concerns over greenwashing continue to grow. Companies are under increasing pressure to demonstrate their sustainability credentials, creating an incentive to communicate positive environmental messages. But terms such as “green”, “sustainable”, “carbon neutral” and “net zero” can mean very different things depending on how they are defined and measured.

Journalistic scrutiny can help separate corporate claims from measurable performance. Asking where the data comes from, how targets are measured, what progress has been achieved and what happens when targets are missed can make ESG reporting more meaningful.

However, the media’s role should not be limited to criticism. It should also recognise genuine progress. Businesses investing in cleaner technologies, improving working conditions, strengthening governance or supporting local communities deserve to have those efforts properly explained to the public. Responsible ESG journalism should therefore provide both scrutiny and context.

There is also a strong case for broadening the ESG conversation beyond investors. Investors require detailed information to assess financial and operational risks, while boards and management teams need ESG data to make strategic decisions. But ESG affects a much wider group of stakeholders.

Workers want to know whether their companies are providing safe and fair workplaces. Consumers want to know whether products are responsibly produced. Communities want to understand how businesses affect their environment and quality of life. Young people increasingly want to know whether the companies they work for and buy from reflect their values.

This is particularly relevant across ASEAN, where economies are becoming increasingly interconnected through trade, investment and regional supply chains. ESG expectations are evolving across the region, but levels of awareness and understanding vary significantly. This creates an opportunity for media organisations to help develop greater ESG literacy among the public.

The challenge is to move ESG from being a specialist corporate language into a broader public conversation.

That does not mean turning every ESG report into a simple story or reducing complex sustainability issues to headlines. Instead, it means providing context, explaining terminology, examining evidence and showing how corporate decisions connect with people’s everyday lives.

Ultimately, ESG reporting should not be viewed simply as a compliance exercise or an investor communication tool. It is part of a wider accountability process.

Companies produce the information. Boards and management use it to make decisions. Investors assess its implications. Regulators establish expectations. But the media can help the public understand what all of it means.

That role is becoming increasingly important.

The real success of ESG reporting should not be measured only by how many pages a company publishes or how sophisticated its sustainability framework appears. It should also be measured by whether stakeholders can understand the information and use it to make informed decisions.

ESG should not remain a language understood only in the boardroom.

If it is genuinely about creating businesses that are environmentally responsible, socially fair and properly governed, then the conversation must reach beyond directors, executives and investors.

The media can help make that happen — by turning ESG from a corporate reporting exercise into a conversation that society can understand, question and participate in.

Writer and Editor Ramani Parkunan shares his insights on demystifying ESG jargon and making the complex language of sustainability more accessible to the public.