Introduction
Sugar consumption in the world is increasingly becoming a concern of many people and organizations, particularly due to increased obesity. According to the report that was released by Forbes in 2012, Americans consumes about 130 pounds of sugar on a yearly basis compared to 20 pounds that were consumed about five decades ago (Babcock, 2017). It is estimated that average American take about 45 grams of sugar after every five days. At the same time, the rate of obesity is increasing at an alarming rate. In 1984, only 9% of Americans were considered obese the rate has increased to 25% currently. It is estimated that 47% of Americans will be obese by 2030. The main cause of the above problems is the consumption of soft drink beverages or sodas (Babcock, 2017). Coca Cola is the leading manufacturer of soft drinks and it is followed closely by Pepsi. Coca Cola has been accused of marketing deception on the sugar content of its drinks. Consequently, the Praxis Project filed suit against Coca Cola and American Beverage Association (ABA) for engaging in a wrong and deceptive marketing of soft drink beverages. The paper, therefore, focuses on the lawsuit that was filed by the Praxis Project against Coca Cola and ABA.
Summary and Background of the Issue
The Praxis Project filed a lawsuit against Coca Cola and ABA in a California district court claiming that the two parties are colluding to engage in a dishonest and misrepresentative marketing of sugar-sweetened drinks. According to the lawsuit, Coca Cola is working closely by ABA to engage in unfair and deceptive marketing practices that are aimed at misleading consumers. The Praxis Project claims that the parties are working together mislead the public about the health implication of taking sodas (Kelly, 2017). The complaints referred to examples of Coca Cola campaigns and ABA enterprises that mislead customers that they can effectively balance the intake of sodas or sugar-sweetened beverages with physical activities to stay healthy.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Some of the campaigns that were cited in the lawsuit include:
Message contained in “essential dehydration” that claim that empty sugar soft drinks are important for our health since they help in dehydration
The “Balance Calorie Initiative” that gave instruction to soda consumers to balance their calorie with exercise or physical activities
“ Be Ok” marketing campaign that is run by Coca Cola that claims that engaging in light activities such as laughing for about 75 minutes helps in health damages that are associated with the consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages.
“ Coming together” campaign that asserts that all calorie counts despite health dangers linked to the consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages.
In addition, the lawsuit alleges that the top management of Coca Cola and ABA always make incorrect and dishonest testimonials about Coca Cola products, especially with regards to the association of sodas and chronic diseases (Khoury, 2017). For instance, the lawsuit pinpoints Coca Cola Senior Vice President who repeated claims that there is scientific evidence that link sugar beverages to obesity and other health diseases. Therefore, according to the lawsuit, Coca Cola and ABA have misled consumers and the public on the effect of sugar beverage on the health of consumers.
The Praxis Project asserts that Coca Cola and ABA violated the Fair Advertising Law in conducting their marketing activities. Consequently, it wants Coca Cola to fund corrective public education campaigns that are aimed at reducing the level of consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages. In addition, the Praxis Project wants the company to post on its website that the consumption of sugar beverages can cause obesity and other health-related diseases such as diabetes and cardiovascular diseases. Hence, the lawsuit is aimed at the reducing consumption of sugar beverages that can cause obesity and other diseases.
On the contrary, Coca Cola has refuted the lawsuit terming it legally and factually meritless. It asserts that the company is more concerned about the health of its consumers. In addition, Coca Cola claims that all its products are safe for human consumption and that its marketing messages are factual and are not misleading as claimed by the Praxis Project ( Huehnergarth , 2017) . Coca Cola went ahead to deny the allegation that it also advertise to children who are under 12 years. At the same time, ABA also denied the claim that it is working with Coca Cola to mislead the public in their marketing campaigns and initiatives. ABA maintained that its main role is to address health challenges that are facing many Americans and it id colluding with health groups and community groups with the aim of reducing calorie and sugar consumption among Americans. ABA termed the lawsuit by the Praxis Project baseless and unfounded.
However, Coca Cola is not new to the controversies involving deceptive marketing and use of false information to persuade consumers to continue taking its products. According to a report by New York Times in 2015, the company was funding and working with a scientist to emphasize on more exercise to reduce obesity instead of consuming less sugar as a way of reducing weight and stay healthy. American Journal of Preventative Medicine also reported that Coca Cola and Pepsi are working together to fund a number of national health organizations and lobby against public health bills that are aimed at reducing the level of sugar content on soft drinks. Therefore, it is not the Praxis Project alone that has claimed that Coca Cola is misleading its consumers through marketing campaigns. Consequently, there are some ethical issues and questions that are raised against Coca Cola Products.
Key Stakeholders and Decision-makers
The key stakeholders in the lawsuit include Coca Cola, ABA, the Praxis Project, California district court, and consumers.
Coca Cola
Coca Cola is an American soft drink company and it is the global leaders in the soft beverage industry. The company is based in Atlanta, Georgia and it is found in almost all countries in the world, making it one of the largest international companies ( Puravankara, 2007) . Coca Cola is the main defendant in the lawsuit that was filled by the Praxis Project because it is the one being accused of engaging in misleading marketing practices. The allegation by the Praxis Project is grave and it can damage the reputation and image of Coca Cola, especially among consumers. Therefore, the company has a task of proving that it does not engage in misleading marketing activities and that its products are healthy for human consumption. It is the stakeholder that will carry the largest cost in the case that the allegation succeeds in the court. Hence, Coca Cola is a key stakeholder in the lawsuit because it has to defend its reputation in order to continue enjoying the massive consumption of its products and gain a competitive advantage in the beverage market.
American Beverage Association (ABA)
ABA is an organization that represents beverage companies in the US and it was originally found in 1919. It is made up of beverage producers, including the producers of bottled water. The main role of ABA is to promote the value of members to the American economy. Another role of the organization to ensure healthy drinking habits among consumers of beverage companies that operates in the US. Therefore, ABA has a role of ensuring that beverage companies such as Coca Cola give marketing messages and information that do not mislead consumers. It should also ensure that Coca Cola engages ethical practices in all its operations. Consequently, has to defend its reputation in the lawsuit by confirming that mainly engage in initiatives that promote healthy consumption of sugar beverage. It must also prove that it cares about the health of Americans. ABA must defend is roles and it must confirm that it is not misused by beverage companies to mislead soft drink consumers.
The Praxis Project
The Praxis Project is a non-profit organization that works closely with local groups and communities to influence policy making with the aim of addressing underlying problems that are facing the people. Its main initiatives include creating healthy people and environment and transforming communities. Therefore, its main undertaking is to shape healthy populations by changing the power relations and structures that touch lives of local people (The Praxis Project, 2017). In the lawsuit, has the burden of proving that Coca Cola and ABA are colluding to mislead the consumer and the public through their marketing practices and initiatives. It must prove hard evidence that Coca Cola is misleading its consumers by giving false information regarding weight loss and calorie consumption. It is the plaintiff in the lawsuit and it must convince the court that its allegation against Coca Cola and ABA is true and that there is need to take action against the two defendants. Therefore, the Praxis Project is the main stakeholder in the lawsuit with the burden of proof.
California District Court
California district court is the chief decision-maker in the law suit and it has a role in ensuring that the truth is known. The court has the responsibility of assessing the evidence presented by plaintiff and defendants to determine the authenticity of the allegations and counter-allegations. California district court must ensure that justice is done and both parties to the lawsuit are satisfied by the decision mad. In addition, California district court must ensure that it is not influenced by external forces that may influence its decisions and interferes with its objectivity. Besides, the public is relying on the court make decisions that are factual. It is the main players in the conflict involving the Praxis Project and Coca Cola. Therefore, the court must make a decision on whether Coca Cola and ABA violated the Fair Advertising Law or not.
Consumers
Consumers are the people who take Coca Cola beverage products. Consumers use about 1.7 billion Coca Cola products on a daily basis and 3.1% of beverages that are consumed globally are made by the company ( Deichert et al., 2006) . Therefore, there are billions of Coca Cola consumers worldwide. Coca Cola consumers need to know the truth about Coca Cola products, especially with regard to their sugary content and how they can affect human health. Consumers are the main victims of marketing malpractices and they are also the people to be affected by high consumption of sugar. Hence, deserve to know the truth about Coca Cola products. Consumers are also important stakeholders in the lawsuit because the decision by the court will influence the way they consume beverages, especially those produced by Coca Cola. Coca Cola must prove to consumers that it produces healthy products in order to maintain their level of loyalty ad satisfaction, which will lead to increased sales.
The US Government
The government is another stakeholder because it is the party that ensures that all companies adhere to the Fair Advertising Law. It is the government that approves and monitors the operations of businesses. Hence, the US government will be interested in knowing whether Coca Cola and ABA have been violating the Fair Advertising Law or not. The government will also ensure that necessary measures are taken against the defendants in the case that the court finds them guilty. It is also the government that formulates and implements policies and laws that guide the operations of firms like Coca Cola and ABA. Therefore, the government is also a stakeholder in the lawsuit.
Key Values and Potential Conflicts
Key Values
It is the responsibility of every company to produce and offer products and services to consumers. Therefore, Coca Cola has the duty of ensuring that all its products are healthy. At the same time, it must ensure that it give factual information to its clients and stakeholders. It should not mislead consumers in its marketing campaign with the aim of increasing sales and profits. Hence, the company has a duty of upholding ethical values in all its operations.
The Praxis Project must also ensure that it gives true information about other companies and their operations. Any information that reaches the public has an effect on how consumers perceive companies and can end up damaging their reputation. The allegation that Coca Cola is misleading consumers is grave and can significantly affect the public image of the company. Hence, the allegation by the Praxis Project must be based on factual evidence. In addition, ABA must be honest in its operations and it should not only side with its member companies but should also be sensitive to the health of consumers.
Therefore, the key values in the Coca Cola lawsuit are truth, honesty, and transparency. Coca Cola and ABA are expected to be truthful and honest in their marketing campaigns and initiatives. Their information and messages should not mislead consumers and the public in general. Coca Cola should also be transparent on the types and the level of ingredients that its uses to manufacture its products. Besides, the Praxis Project must also ensure that its allegations are truthful. It should also be honest in conveying the message to the public. All the stakeholders in the lawsuit should uphold truth, honesty, and transparency.
Potential Conflicts
There are two main conflicts in the Coca Cola lawsuit. The first conflict is the need to produce healthy beverage products. Due to increased concerns about obesity and obesity-related diseases, a number of organizations have been championing for the production of soft drinks that contain minimum sugar and calorie ( Bray, 2010) . Consequently, the Praxis Project, an organization that advocates for healthy living, felt that Coca Cola in collaboration with ABA is misleading the public in their marketing campaigns and initiatives, especially with regard to losing weight, obesity, and the effect of calorie on the health of consumers of sugar-sweetened beverages. In addition, due to health concerns of consumers, Coca Cola wants to convince its consumers that its products are healthy for human consumption. It wants to persuade its consumers that the consumption of calorie is not harmful when it is combined with some physical activities. Therefore, the conflicts emerge when the Praxis Projects want to ensure that people consume healthy beverages while Coca Cola wants to convince its customers that its products are healthy in order to increase its sales volume.
The second conflict is the need by Coca Cola to maximize its profits. Like any other business in the world, the main objective of Coca Cola is to maximize profits while minimizing the cost of operations. As a result, it has to lure its customers through the use deceptive marketing strategies and it ends up violating the Fair Advertising Law. Hence, the need to maximize profit creates a conflict between Coca Cola and the Praxis Project. The Praxis Project is a non-profit company that is not interested in the profit but the health of the people.
Key Factual Claims and Disputes
The main claim is that Coca Cola is misleading consumers with its marketing campaigns and initiatives. Coca Cola finds it hard to acknowledge that excessive consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages can cause obesity and other diseases such as diabetes. Even though the claim by Coca Cola that that physical exercise can reduce obesity is true, some of its allegations laughing for 75 minutes reduce obesity are not true ( Ludwig, Peterson & Gortmaker, 2001) . Coca Cola is putting more emphasis on the role of physical activities in reducing obesity than the need to consume less sugary drinks. Therefore, the company is evading the truth, as it is not ready and willing to tell its customers the negative effects of consuming its products.
Consequently, Coca Cola is seen to be violating the Fair Advertising Law by pro-health organizations such as the Praxis Project. The need to produce healthy products is creating the dispute between Coca Cola and the Praxis Project. The Praxis Project expects Coca Cola to produce healthy products while Coca Cola must also engage in the most attractive and effective marketing strategies to increase its sales.
Key Policy Options
There are a number of policy options that can be used to reduce deceptive marketing by companies such as Coca Cola. However, the main policy option should be the formulation of effective laws that regulate marketing activities. The US is already having the Fair Advertising Laws that is used regulate marketing campaigns by businesses. But it seems that the law is not being followed by many companies, especially established companies that are influential such as Coca Cola. In order to ensure that the existing laws and policies are followed, the government should establish an agency that ensures that businesses comply with existing marketing laws ( Wilson, 2004) . At the same time, violating such laws should attract heavy penalties such as deregistration of a company. The established agency should also closely monitor marketing activities of various businesses and should not wait for the laws to be violated in order to take action.
The second policy option is to ensure that every marketing claim or message is backed with evidence. All companies should be made to account for their marketing messages by producing evidence to support their claims. For instance, in the case of Coca Cola, it should be made to substantiate that laughing for 75 minutes can help a sugar-sweetened consumer lose weight. A mere claim that can be substantiated should be punished and the company should be made to bear the responsibility. Government regulatory agencies should ensure that such evidence are valid and the information is accurately portrayed to the targeted consumers.
Another policy should be formulated that ensure that all ingredients that are used to manufacture beverages are clearly labeled. For instance, Coca Cola should clearly state the amount of calorie or sugar that is contained in every bottle of its products. The percentage of the content should be visible and should be written in a way that it can be understood and interpreted by average consumers. Producers of beverages should be made to clearly state the possible harmful effects of their products in order to enable consumers to make informed and voluntary decisions ( Kopp, 2006) . The policy will not only help consumers to make informed decisions, but it will also reduce the level of non-compliance cases and dispute between customers and producers. The same policy should ensure that consumers have the right to seek any information from producers regarding the content and the effect of a product on users.
I also think that the government should come up with a restriction on the level of sugar that can be used to produce soft drinks. Leaving companies like Coca Cola to decide the level of sugar to use in manufacturing sugar-sweetened beverages encourage them to put more sugar on the products. The aim of such policies should be to protect consumers from using harmful products that can affect their health and wellbeing ( Calvert, 2008) . Established companies like Coca Cola should not be allowed to interfere with the formulation of such policies. The amount of sugar that should be used to produce soft drinks should be determined by experts and should be based on evidence. In addition, any company that is used violating the required standards should be heavily punished to encourage others to adhere to the policy. The government has a responsibility of ensuing that consumers are protected from harmful products. Besides, it should ensure that the policies are strictly followed by business.
Conclusion
There is the need for the society to protect its people. Therefore, companies such as Coca Cola should be prevented from producing unhealthy products. At the same time, they should not be allowed to use deceptive marketing campaigns and initiatives that can mislead consumers. It is the role of pro-life organizations such as Praxis Project to ensure that consumers are protected from unhealthy products. The government and individuals should also play a part in ensuring that the public is not deceived by firms. Hence, Coca Cola and ABA should receive heavy punishment in the case that it is found that it engages in deceptive marketing. However, it is also important to create enabling an environment for businesses to thrive. The operations of businesses should be guided by clear laws and policies. The government should formulate and implement policies that ensure that businesses are engaging in deceptive marketing strategies and other unethical practices.
References
Babcock, L. (2017). Coca Cola Sued for Marketing Deception, What Long Term Health Effects of Sugary Drinks? Retrieved from http://www.inquisitr.com/3858813/coca-cola-sued-to-marketing-deception-what-are-the-long-term-health-effects-of-sugary-drinks/
Bray, G. A. (2010). Soft drink consumption and obesity: it is all about fructose. Current opinion in lipidology , 21 (1), 51-57.
Calvert, S. L. (2008). Children as consumers: Advertising and marketing. The future of children , 18 (1), 205-234.
Deichert, M., et. al. (2006). Industry Analysis: Soft Drinks. Global Business Leadership Student Work. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.csbsju.edu/gbl_students/2
Huehnergarth , N., (2017). Even If It Fails, Lawsuit Accusing Coca-Cola Of Consumer Deception Could Yield Benefits For Health Advocates . Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/nancyhuehnergarth/2017/01/06/lawsuit-alleges-coca-cola- uses-tobacco-industry-tactics-to-deceive-consumers/#3f63360f6e90
Kelly, J. (2017). Coca-Cola Sued for Alleged Deceptive Marketing . Retrieved from http://fortune.com/2017/01/05/coca-cola-sued-soda-marketing/
Khoury, G. (2017). Coca-Cola Sued Over Deceptive Marketing . Retrieved from http://blogs.findlaw.com/common_law/2017/01/coca-cola-sued-over-deceptive- marketing.html
Kopp, C. (2006). Considerations on Deception Techniques Used in Political and Product Marketing. Melbourne: Monash University.
Ludwig, D. S., Peterson, K. E., & Gortmaker, S. L. (2001). The relation between consumption of sugar-sweetened drinks and childhood obesity: A prospective, observational analysis. The Lancet , 357 (9255), 505-508.
Puravankara, D. (2007). Strategic analysis of the Coca-Cola company (M.B.A Research Project Thesis). Simon Fraser University.
The Praxis Project, (2017). Who We Are . Retrieved from https://www.thepraxisproject.org/who- we-are/mission-approach/
Wilson, C. M. (2004). Price deception, market power, and consumer policy . University of Oxford.
