Coca Cola has recently been banned from advertising its Coke products through the "Be OK" ad. The advertisement claimed that few simple exercises could burn off a can of Coke (139 Calories). MarketingWeek reported that the Advertising Standards Authority justified that its message was misleading. However, Coke continues their calorie advertising campaigns.
Having read an article on CNN Health about diet soda, I found it difficult to believe in Coke zero advertisements. Though it is possible to create zero Calorie beverages by using artificial sweeteners, I am more concerned for the health issues behind the chemicals. In the Be OK advertisement, the combination of exercises may or may not burn 139 Calories depending on the intensity of each activity. This becomes misleading to frequent Coke consumers and may comfort their guilt for continuous intake. Moreover, I believe that Coke’s zero calorie messages mislead consumers who are not aware of how Calories are actually calculated and how they are artificially minimized in diet Cokes.
This leads me to think whether or not chemically altered food and beverage can be truthfully depicted and advertised. Is it unethical to leave out some aspects of the product when advertising? For example, diet Coke emphasized on zero calories instead of the artificial ingredients used. Ice cream brands advertise their creamy soft ice cream textures, but how much of its ingredients are actual dairy products? I believe it is definitely unethical to market a food product in a way that would mislead viewers and evade from related health issues. However, the line that constitutes what is ethical and unethical is becoming thinner due to various reported researches, controversial information and data overload. Therefore, instead of blaming companies for putting up border-line unethical advertisements, we should be responsible and informative consumers before purchasing any product.
Leave a Reply