Will Oreos Learn From Past Failures?

Oreo is considering becoming the next major brand to get the Bud Light treatment. The cookie company’s Chicago-headquartered parent organization, Mondelēz International, will be confronted at its annual shareholder meeting on Wednesday over how its LGBTQ marketing could demolish business and irreparably tarnish the brand.

Contrast Opinion

According to a two-page proposal, which NLPC (National Legal and Policy Center) will present to the shareholders this week, Mondelēz “irresponsibly” involves itself in politically divisive issues and is deeply embroiled in left-wing activism.  Consequently, he creates “reputational and financial risk.” Mondelēz is “playing with fire” by joining forces with far-left gender ideologues, NLPC says ^[1].

NLPC suggests that Mondelēz scrutinize areas of risk where he and his labels have engaged in “risky relationships” with outside organizations, such as the “ill-advised” one Oreo has with the LGBTQ pressure group PFLAG.

PFLAG

Since at least 2020, the cookie giant has been a “proud” partner of PFLAG, previously called the national Parents, Families, & Friends of Lesbians and Gays network. PFLAG. This organization actively lobbies against state laws seeking to protect minors from medical butchery while pushing so-called “gender-affirming” procedures onto school-aged children as young as three years old.

PFLAG also battles to place pornographic books in public schools and libraries where children can easily access them. It characterizes its child indoctrination efforts in public education as a stand against “book banning.” In addition to supporting legislation that promotes LGBTQ literature’s inclusion in K-12 classrooms, PLFAG co-sponsors a “banned books” website as part of a coalition.

NLPC Reasons

NLPC asks the question to Mondelēz’s shareholders.

So should a brand such as Oreo, so identified with children, also be so deeply intertwined with the aggressive promotion of the LGBTQ tactics and agenda of militant groups like PFLAG ^[2]?

NLPC compared with other businesses that went the way of the altered-mind crowd. After the Mulvaney campaign, consumers boycotted Bud Light, which resulted in AB InBev suffering a 28 percent dip in pre-tax profit during the second quarter of 2023. The situation worsened with hundreds of layoffs. Overall, the toll was roughly $1.4 billion in lost sales to date.

Additionally, the Target Corporation featured “tuck-friendly” swimsuits during Pride Month designed for boys pretending to be girls. This ended disastrously. Consumer backlash cost the company $10 billion in market value over 10 days! Its stock price plummeted, and Target’s quarterly sales fell for the first time in six years.

NLPC adds that boycotts can come quietly and without warning. Once they come, it is difficult for a business to backtrack.

Time will tell if Mondelez will listen to the watch group or the loud lobbyists if family-minded people will stand against the pressure from groups putting pressure to change how children are born and boycotted or not.