Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Advertising Ethics


Coke and Pepsi are both in the process of changing their soft drinks.  This is all due the possible cancer link in the caramel coloring that they put in their soda.  There has been research shown on mice that 4-methylimidazole has been known to cause cancer.  This has not been proved on humans, and quite frankly if it wasn’t for the state of California we probably wouldn’t have ever heard anything about it.  California has added 4-methylimidazole to their list of carcinogens, or cancer causing items.   As a result all Coke and Pepsi products that are brown in color would have to have a cancer warning label on it to be sold in the State of California. 
Although the American Beverage Association (ABA) stated they can’t find a link between the dye and cancer both Coca-Cola and Pepsi are removing it from their products.  They both claim it isn’t because of the potential of causing cancer, but rather the marketing headache it would wreak if they had to put a cancer warning on something consumers drink.  Remembering back to Coca-Cola’s extremely failed new coke taste last century both companies are promising there won’t be any change in the taste.
California is making these companies change their product because ti could be unhealthy.  Is it the companies responsibility to be proactive and change their product before there is a huge issue?  What would the damage be financially and psychologically to the companies if their products were proven to help cause cancer?  If it isn’t just an ethical responsibility to change, maybe it is in their best interest financially to try to make their product healthy for the consumers, to avoid issues in the long run.

No comments:

Post a Comment