Ben & Jerry's back gay marriage proposal

Blikes

Vermont-based ice cream maker Ben & Jerry’s is supporting gay marriage in Britain by repackaging an apple pie flavour as Apple-y Ever After.

The subsidiary of the global food and cosmetics conglomerate Unilever is issuing the newly labelled ice cream in the United Kingdom as Parliament begins debating legislation that would allow same-sex couples to marry.

Should corporations keep out of political affairs or do you think more power to them, Stand up for your gay employees right to marry?

Source:http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/world/ben-and-jerrys-back-gay-marriage-543872.html

Leeg17

OP, can you post a source to that article?

Thanks.

El Weirdo

Blikes wrote: »

Should corporations keep out of political affairs or do you think more power to them, Stand up for your gay employees customers' right to marry?

FYP. They're just going for the gay dollar.

/cynic

AnamGlas

In other news, chocolate flavour has been renamed to "Packed Fudge".

Cavehill Red

Blikes wrote: »

Should corporations keep out of political affairs or do you think more power to them, Stand up for your gay employees right to marry?

Source:http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/world/ben-and-jerrys-back-gay-marriage-543872.html

They're seen as a liberal hippy company anyway, but this will still do their bottom line (oo-er) no favours in the bible belt.

For the record, this is an appalling precedent to set. It's not too far from this to voting for the Coke or Pepsi candidates in elections. Some might argue we're there already, but I'm not quite that cynical.

Yet.

Toby Take a Bow

Yeah, I presume they conducted some sort of study which suggested that a 'news' piece like this would garner favourable publicity and would result in better sales. It seems to fit with their 'ethos'.

Atomicjuicer

Pixar and google playing up the politics too. Personally I don't need it rubbed in my face so I'll be steering clear.

duckduckgo.com is google without the tracking
hotmail is better than gmail these days too
quality in Ben and Jerry's has been nose diving the last few years so shouldnt be too hard to swap out.

Thanks for the tip.

jill_valentine

If you ran a giant successful company, wouldn't you want it to operate in a way that didn't breach your own ethical boundaries and values? Nothing ever changed because people stayed silent, why should people in positions of worth stop having opinons and expressing them through the channels they have available? That's not the same thing as buying political candidates or something, it's putting an idea on a product, and it's up to the market whether they sink or swim on the back of that.

It's not a cheap bit of one off sensationalism in itself, it's the latest in the consistent expression of the company's "personality". More power to them.

Bad Panda

Blikes wrote: »

Should corporations keep out of political affairs or do you think more power to them, Stand up for your gay employees right to marry?

Source:http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/world/ben-and-jerrys-back-gay-marriage-543872.html

I guess they're within their rights to support whatever cause they wish, but I'm suspicious of their motives to say the least. Corpo's don't do anything out of nobility.

Chuck Stone

Cream.

Fudge.

Stiff.

Somnus

I say fair play to them. The article states they did similar a couple of years ago with a similar law in their own region.

Big companies coming out (pun intended) in favour of these sort of issues is good I think. And if it helps their sales, so be it. It's a win - win

Toby Take a Bow

jill_valentine wrote: »

If you ran a giant successful company, wouldn't you want it to operate in a way that didn't breach your own ethical boundaries and values?

You may want to, and but your bottom line will be profit. When it comes down to it, and there's a battle between profit and ethics, profit will always win out for these companies. So you could argue that it may harm the ethical concerns the company are expressing if they abandon them a couple of years down the line when they expand/come into a recession/their ice-cream starts to taste like crap so they design ever more pointless rebrands as if the rebrands further acceptance of gay marriage. A good example of this would be Google's initial ethical concerns and how they had to ditch them when they grew and expanded into territories which didn't share those values.

krudler

Atomicjuicer wrote: »

Pixar and google playing up the politics too. Personally I don't need it rubbed in my face so I'll be steering clear.

duckduckgo.com is google without the tracking
hotmail is better than gmail these days too
quality in Ben and Jerry's has been nose diving the last few years so shouldnt be too hard to swap out.

Thanks for the tip.

*snigger*

Corkfeen

Cavehill Red wrote: »

They're seen as a liberal hippy company anyway, but this will still do their bottom line (oo-er) no favours in the bible belt.

For the record, this is an appalling precedent to set. It's not too far from this to voting for the Coke or Pepsi candidates in elections. Some might argue we're there already, but I'm not quite that cynical.

Yet.

Ya t'is an awful precedent when companies are backing equality.........

jill_valentine

Toby Take a Bow wrote: »

You may want to, and but your bottom line will be profit. When it comes down to it, and there's a battle between profit and ethics, profit will always win out for these companies. So you could argue that it may harm the ethical concerns the company are expressing if they abandon them a couple of years down the line when they expand/come into a recession/their ice-cream starts to taste like crap so they design ever more pointless rebrands as if the rebrands further acceptance of gay marriage. A good example of this would be Google's initial ethical concerns and how they had to ditch them when they grew and expanded into territories which didn't share those values.

Google is still wrestling with this, and so is Ben & Jerrys, and in all likelyhood, both will probably continue to do so as long as both companies exist. Profit doesn't always & only win out, it's a huge giant consideration among other, littler considerations. You don't lose sight of it, sure, but that doesn't mean you don't steer the ship in roughly the direction you'd prefer to travel all the same.

mikemac1

What's new, big business are always getting involved in controversial topics

The lot of them favour breaking down immigration restrictions so they get cheaper labour

This is just something else

krudler

god made adam and eve not ben and jerry.

is that how it goes?

Toby Take a Bow

jill_valentine wrote: »

Google is still wrestling with this, and so is Ben & Jerrys, and in all likelyhood, both will probably continue to do so as long as both companies exist. Profit doesn't always & only win out, it's a huge giant consideration among other, littler considerations. You don't lose sight of it, sure, but that doesn't mean you don't steer the ship in roughly the direction you'd prefer to travel all the same.

Maybe I'm just too cynical. I did notice that for all Google's good intentions (not doing evil being a good intention, and all that) China was too big a market for them to stick by their one golden rule.

I only know about Ben + Jerry's ethical concerns from watching their ads, all of which use them as their main selling point. I'm guessing that Ben + Jerry's (despite their ads) are not made by two guys in the back end of nowhere in America, and that they made the decision to float their company, knowing the risks of mergers or hostile takeovers. I wonder how their ethical concerns sit with their new company? I wonder if the new bosses decided to take a couple of issues to highlight while compromising on other basic principles?

Somnus

Toby Take a Bow wrote: »

Maybe I'm just too cynical. I did notice that for all Google's good intentions (not doing evil being a good intention, and all that) China was too big a market for them to stick by their one golden rule.

I only know about Ben + Jerry's ethical concerns from watching their ads, all of which use them as their main selling point. I'm guessing that Ben + Jerry's (despite their ads) are not made by two guys in the back end of nowhere in America, and that they made the decision to float their company, knowing the risks of mergers or hostile takeovers. I wonder how their ethical concerns sit with their new company? I wonder if the new bosses decided to take a couple of issues to highlight while compromising on other basic principles?

While I totally agree that companies will contradict themselves in ethical issues, I still think it's good to come out in favour of issues of equality like this, even if it is motivated by money. Like I said, everyone wins.

Toby Take a Bow

Dr.Poca wrote: »

While I totally agree that companies will contradict themselves in ethical issues, I still think it's good to come out in favour of issues of equality like this, even if it is motivated by money. Like I said, everyone wins.

Yeah, it probably is a win-win situation. What I'd be more concerned about is whether the company are balancing this kind of PR-stunt by abandoning other policies. And, of course, whether rebranding flavours of ice-cream is really the best way to promote gay marriage.

Somnus

Toby Take a Bow wrote: »

I'd be more concerned about is whether the company are balancing this kind of PR-stunt by abandoning other policies.

It's possible, but I wouldn't have thought of that myself, and I'm fairly cynical! :P

Toby Take a Bow wrote: »

And, of course, whether rebranding flavours of ice-cream is really the best way to promote gay marriage.

You're right there. And to be honest I don't even think it needs to be promoted. It's gonna happen either way. Maybe that's their plan! They can say they helped once it gets passed

jill_valentine

Toby Take a Bow wrote: »

And, of course, whether rebranding flavours of ice-cream is really the best way to promote gay marriage.

Probably not the best no, but it makes sense that ice cream might prove to be the chosen medium of... well, people who make ice cream.

Logical Fallacy

El Weirdo wrote: »

FYP. They're just going for the gay dollar.

/cynic

I'd say there is a sizable portion of the population who will actively stop buying the product out of protest, so it's a flawed business move if that is the case.

oppenheimer1

Dr.Poca wrote: »

I say fair play to them. The article states they did similar a couple of years ago with a similar law in their own region.

Big companies coming out (pun intended) in favour of these sort of issues is good I think. And if it helps their sales, so be it. It's a win - win

Surely its only good if they come out on the side you agree with?

Toby Take a Bow

jill_valentine wrote: »

Probably not the best no, but it makes sense that ice cream might prove to be the chosen medium of... well, people who make ice cream.

Might be. Giving a percentage of your profits to an organisation that specialise in promoting gay marriage might be even better (maybe they do this as well).

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

I'd say there is a sizable portion of the population who will actively stop buying the product out of protest, so it's a flawed business move if that is the case.

Maybe, but Ben + Jerry's seems to have been founded on 'ethical' concerns, and has incorporated that into their image. All their ads seem to have an element of this (although gay marriage is a little different from fair trade and that kind of thing for an ice-cream manufacturer).

Somnus

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Surely its only good if they come out on the side you agree with?

Who disagrees with equality?

kowloon

Toby Take a Bow wrote: »

Maybe, but Ben + Jerry's seems to have been founded on 'ethical' concerns, and has incorporated that into their image. All their ads seem to have an element of this (although gay marriage is a little different from fair trade and that kind of thing for an ice-cream manufacturer).

They're not an independent company anymore though, they were bought out.

oppenheimer1

Dr.Poca wrote: »

Who disagrees with equality?

Poster said these sorts of issues, to which I thought he was referring to social issues in general, like gay marriage. What if a powerful company came out on an issue that he didn't agree with, would he think it was still ok?

I don't like companies pretending to have a social conscience... not companies like Unilever anyway. They are only out to protect the bottom line and shareholder value, lets never forget that.

The words of Groucho Marx are particularly apt for publicly floated companies "Those are my principles. If you don't like them I have others."

Toby Take a Bow

kowloon wrote: »

They're not an independent company anymore though, they were bought out.

Yeah, presumed they weren't independent. I mentioned above how that would cause further problems in a situation like this.

Somnus

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Poster said these sorts of issues, to which I thought he was referring to social issues in general, like gay marriage. What if a powerful company came out on an issue that he didn't agree with, would he think it was still ok?

I don't like companies pretending to have a social conscience... not companies like Unilever anyway. They are only out to protect the bottom line and shareholder value, lets never forget that.

The words of Groucho Marx are particularly apt for publicly floated companies "Those are my principles. If you don't like them I have others."

Ah fair enough, I was just thinking of this situation. I mean if it was my company, I wouldn't be expressing views on my packaging. If I was asked my own views, that's fine, but I wouldn't put them on my product.

Jesus Wept

Are Ben and Jerry gay together?

trollin trollin trollin

Nope they just enjoy spooning together

The Brigadier

I object to my choice of ice cream becoming a political choice.

phasers

Why do we only get like 6 Ben and Jerry's flavours in Ireland? I mean I love a bit of caramel choo choo but sometimes I'd like to mix it up.

LH Pathe

phasers wrote: »

Why do we only get like 6 Ben and Jerry's flavours in Ireland? I mean I love a bit of caramel choo choo but sometimes I'd like to mix it up.

yeah I'd love a bit of black & tan

LH Pathe

New flavour: Jenny's berry.

vanilla, cherry and drizzle of jenizzle

RichieC

I find it hilarious that suddenly the nuright troglodytes have issues with corporate meddling in politics.. :rolleyes:

df1985

Ben and Jerrys arent the only ones.Apple,pixar,microsoft,google etc etc all support it. its gonna happen...

trollin trollin trollin

LH Pathe wrote: »

yeah I'd love a bit of black & tan

could they not have chosen a better name!:mad:

Why put so much effort into being seen to support one minority then do **** like this