Opinion
Don’t buy into Coke's green claims
Story by Jessica Mayrer | April 2, 2008
Montana Kaimin
Poised to ramp up their marketing efforts at the University of Montana, Coca-Cola is taking full advantage of UM’s cash crunch to spread misleading advertising on campus.
As part of Coke’s proposed $8 million contract with UM, they get a new platform to voice faux sustainability claims, and they also gets exclusive rights to beverage sales.
As UM’s contract with Coke is set to expire in August 2009, they are ready to put up a 9-foot-by-12-foot sign touting their work toward achieving a healthy planet.
But it’s a sham. Coke has an abysmal record as an environmental steward.
Whistleblowers in India have called Coke out on a number of environmental issues. Wastewater was allowed to seep out of Coke plants and into fields used for growing food; well water relied upon to irrigate crops was drained by the company; and the BBC reports soda tainted with pesticides was sold in India.
The BBC also reported that in 2003 Coke shipped waste to local farmers, telling them it was good for their crops. The “fertilizer” had traces of cadmium and lead, both poisonous.
Folks are getting wind of Coke’s real environmental history, and it’s causing a public relations challenge for the company.
College campuses across the nation have cancelled contracts with Coke because of their icky environmental record and alleged violence used by the company against union organizers in Colombia.
As their bad reputation spreads, the company is pumping up efforts to clean up its image. They have already bought UM two new recycling trucks. Aw shucks, what a sweet gesture.
In an attempt to woo campus administrators and students, Coke is disguising their environmental record behind a green smokescreen.
Public education is strapped for cash. But the university system needs to take a stand to ensure we aren’t promoting bad business from behind a green façade.
UM needs to kick its Coke habit.
And kicking any habit requires a support group. In this case, that group is the Montana Legislature. Our representatives need to support this “public” institution so we don’t rely on payoffs from self-interested corporations peddling half-truths for profit.
This story has been viewed 530 times.
Comments
The basis for Ms. Mayrer’s cynical generalizations is biased on propaganda, misinformation, internet rumor and urban legend. Anyone interested in wanting to really understand these issues can go to www.cokefact.com and www.gettherealfacts.co.uk.com for objectively validated, substantiated, corroborated information and public records. What you’ll find there is that there is no truth to these allegations; that these have been proven false time and again; and that professional outside agitators with political agendas are behind much of these false claims and take advantage of gullible cynics to spread their conspiracy theories.
Posted by Diana Garza Ciarlante on 04/02/2008 at 11:53 am
Ah, www.cokefacts.org… An objective viewpoint of the Coca-Cola company brought to you by Coca-Cola itself!
Ms. Mayrer is an amazingly competent and eloquent individual, entirely capable of doing her own research - without being fed misinformation or propaganda.
Is Coca-Cola the world’s worst corporation? No. Is it a big-hearted proponent of the labor or sustainability movements? Definitely not. If anyone is guilty of promoting misinformation through propaganda, it is you, Ms. Garza Clarlante!
Posted by Jamee Greer on 04/02/2008 at 5:36 pm
If Ms. Mayrer is such “an amazing individual”, why not provide some balanced reporting. Coke’s assesment, which Ms. Greer seems to think of as propaganda, was performed by The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI), a highly regarded international and independent scientific research organization based in New Delhi, India.
Ms. Mayrer is a typical of anti-capitalist journalists!
Posted by Jack on 04/22/2008 at 9:17 am
