moonbattery logo

Dec 05 2011

Coke’s Polar Bear Campaign Fizzles

Coca-cola’s irritating attempt to exploit global warming moonbattery with white polar bear cans has turned out to be the company’s biggest blunder since New Coke:

Coca-Cola Co. is switching back to its time-honored red just one month after rolling out its flagship cola in a snow-white can for the holidays. New seasonal cans in red will start shipping by next week, as white cans — initially expected to be in stores through February — make an exit.

While the company has frequently rung in the holiday with special can designs, this was the first time it put regular Coke in a white can. Some consumers complained that it looked confusingly similar to Diet Coke’s silver cans. Others felt that regular Coke tasted different in the white cans. Still others argued that messing with red bordered on sacrilege.

The cans not only look like diet, they hype Coca-cola’s partnership with the malignant World Wildlife Fund, a moonbat outfit devoted to promoting the alleged interests of man-eating beasts at the expense of our own. Hopefully Coke will learn to stick to manufacturing soda and leave the radical left politics to journalists.

The Al Gore of soda marketing campaigns.

On a tip from The MaryHunter.

16 Responses to “Coke’s Polar Bear Campaign Fizzles”

  1. Sam Adams says:

    Over the past 25 years, the polar bear population has increased from 5,000 to 25,000. Endangered they aren’t!!!

  2. Spider says:

    Since they still haven’t recovered from their disastrous formula change some years ago, you think they would know better than to mess with their image. Apparently not. I’ll stick with Pepsi…

  3. Jester says:

    Ha ha! Looks like Coke’s CEO won’t be listening to his whiny PC daughter anymore.

  4. Bob Roberts says:

    The government of Nunavut will oppose a U.S. proposal to list polar bears as a threatened species, Environment Minister Patterk Netser says.

    Actually the truth is this: Where polar bears are hunted without ANY limits, they are showing a decline in population. This applies to TWO of the 13 “populations” of polar bears. In a majority of areas, polar bears are doing just fine and don’t need “protection”. The answer is to educate those indigenous people regarding proper stewardship of their vital resource, not this nonsense suggested by the greeniacs.

  5. Bob Roberts says:

    Note, also, that though they claimed polar bears were “endangered”, the best they could do was twist facts enough to justify a lower classification, “threatened”, which isn’t true either.

    The facts are here. They include:

    Polar bear populations are at record highs.
    OK it turns out they have increased the number of “populations” from 13 to 19 since I last looked – no doubt because they have now determined previous larger groups that they thought were interacting are not, so certain groups became subdivided. In any case, 3/4 of the now 19 recognized populations are increasing or stable, if I heard him right. The ones that aren’t don’t have to worry about “climate change”. The only significant threat to them is excessive hunting by so-called “indigenous” peoples. The fuss over the polar bears is caused by the same lies that brought you “anthropogenic global warming” – that is due to deliberately false and speculative forecasting based on dubious if not outright ridiculous perversion of facts and math.
    As with the global warming hoax, instead of looking at what is actually happening, this nonsense hysteria is based 100% on what a few already proven wrong alarmists are saying COULD happen, based on their own flawed interpretations of what IS happening.
    Look, the Earth has been warming since the last ice age. Only an idiot would say that humans have anything to do with it. But this shows one of the dangers of too much government, because once the government makes a mistake (listing polar bears as “threatened” without any just reason for doing so) it becomes virtually impossible to correct that mistake and then a whole series of other mistakes inevitably follow.

  6. Piker says:

    Bring back cane sugar and get rid of the corn syrup while yer at it…

  7. Goldenfoxx says:

    Matters not to me what they put on the can, I won’t buy any cocoa-crap product. That stuff along with others has caused an array of medical problems. All it is is flavored colored water that fizz’s. And I don’t do politically correct either.

  8. Jimbo says:

    Coke has had some real marketing gaffs in the past, also. “New Coke” anyone?

    It doesn’t matter to me – the only time I’ll drink a Coke is when it’s mixed with copious amounts of the proper libation.

  9. Tom says:

    @ Piker

    Coke sells their cane-sugar-sweetened product to Mexico. COSTCO imports it by the case.
    For the US market, “drink the high-fucktose corn syrup and shut up.”

    It’s great for getting hard water stains out of the dishwasher.

  10. fxdwg says:

    Haven’t had a Coke in years.

  11. beforethestorm says:

    I think the can looks cool. I like the polar bears. Just take off the nod to man-made global warming fantasy.

    I have no dog in this fight; I don’t drink soda much.

  12. Jim - PRS says:

    “Hopefully Coke will learn to stick to manufacturing soda and leave the radical left politics to journalists.”

    Solid gold, that.

  13. Sarge says:

    It’s the water in Atlanta, drives every body left.

  14. Cameraman says:

    When they Put REAL Coke in the Can I will start drinking it again!

  15. KHarn says:

    >Others felt that regular Coke tasted different in the white cans.<

    They can taste the Liberal smugness.

  16. Lgbpop says:

    Serves them right for trying to steal Polar Soda Company’s mascot years ago. To this day I do not understand how money trumped trademark law, but then again that was the Clinton administration.

Alibi3col theme by Themocracy