Ben and Jerry’s decided to join the Woke Train to Nowhere, and it has officially cost them big. Publix CEO Joe Barron released a memo stating that the company, which is employee-owned and very family oriented, will no longer carry Ben and Jerry’s Ice cream products.
“They’ve engaged in a culture war, unfortunately, which is an inherently adult ideology,” said Barron, “but they sell…ice cream. Until we find a way to keep children away from ice cream, our stores won’t carry the brand.”
There are several other chains considering dropping Vermont’s most famous dessert, including Aldi, Food Lion, and Kroeger.
“We’re not really sure what their issue is,” said Ben, “all we did is stop advertising on Twitter. We haven’t added any satanic imagery to our products or anything, so…”
Barron responded that it’s the principle that matters. “If they don’t think it’s wrong to pander to groomers, that’s on them. Personally, I value free speech, as I know our employees do as well.”
The whole thing seems extremely unnecessary, but in the end, “go woke go broke” for the win. While the boycotts are doing little to nothing in the real world, Conservaturdia sure does believe it’s all crumbling to the ground. God Bless America.
Story about Publix dropping Ben & Jerry’s products originated on satire site
Ice cream purveyor Ben & Jerry’s has long been vocal about its activism and progressive values, seeking to “eliminate injustices in our local, national and international communities.”
But that mission has not provoked a grocery store chain to drop the company’s wares. Some bloggers are claiming otherwise.
“Publix drops Ben and Jerry’s ‘for the good of our kids,’” reads a June 4 headline on a blog simply titled “News Article.”
This post was flagged as part of Meta’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram.)
Maria Brous, a Publix spokesperson, told PolitiFact the story is false.
“Our stores carry Ben & Jerry’s ice cream,” Brous said.
There’s a big clue in the story that it’s not authentic news. The post says, “Publix CEO Joe Barron released a memo stating that the company, which is employee-owned and very family oriented, will no longer carry Ben & Jerry’s ice cream products.”
Publix’s CEO is Todd Jones, not Joe Barron.
We found no press releases on Publix’s website announcing that it has dropped Ben & Jerry’s products.
And searching for Ben & Jerry’s products in Publix locations around the country, we found some favorite flavors on store shelves. Pints of Half Baked, for example, are on aisle 9 in a Publix in Tampa, Florida.
Searching for other coverage of this alleged news, we found the exact same story published on The Dunning-Kruger Times, a self-described satire website.
We rate claims that Publix has dropped Ben & Jerry’s products False.
Summary
Ben & Jerry’s sues parent company Unilever for stifling its stance on Gaza
The ice-cream maker said Unilever threatened to “dismantle” its independent board and sue its board members if it issued a statement calling for a “ceasefire” in the region.
Dive Brief:
Ben & Jerry’s filed a lawsuit against its parent company Unilever last week, alleging the consumer goods giant has silenced multiple attempts by the ice cream maker to advocate for Palestinians being impacted by the war in Gaza and support a cease-fire, according to court documents.
The ice cream maker said, in one instance, Unilever threatened to “dismantle” its independent board and sue its board members if it issued a statement calling for “peace and a permanent and immediate ceasefire” in the region, according to a Nov. 13 complaint filed in a federal court in New York. The suit also alleged the president of Unilever’s ice cream business, Peter ter Kulve, and its global head of litigation, Jeff Eglash, threatened Ben & Jerry’s employees with “professional reprisals” if the company issued statements advocating for a cease-fire.
Unilever said its “heart goes out to all the victims of the tragic events in the Middle East,” and that it rejects the claims made by Ben and Jerry’s social mission board, per emailed comments sent to ESG Dive on Tuesday. “We will defend our case very strongly,” a company spokesperson added.
Dive Insight:
Ben and Jerry’s alleged that in addition to stifling a statement that called for a cease-fire in Gaza, Unilever also censored a public statement the ice cream maker intended to publish to support those protesting against the war at college campuses around the country. The ice cream maker said the statement vouched for the protestors’ First Amendment rights and was in line with the company’s “long history of supporting such discourse,” but its release was barred by Eglash, per the suit.
The lawsuit also claims Unilever blocked Ben and Jerry’s from making donations to Jewish Voice for Peace and the Council on American Islamic Relations — organizations that seek to collect and disburse humanitarian aid to Palestinians impacted by the war in the Gaza Strip. The complaint said that though Unilever alleged its reasoning for blocking the donation was to maintain a “neutral” stance on the conflict, it made a public donation of 500,000 Euros ($528,670) to an Israeli emergency medical service and blood bank that acts as an auxiliary service to the Israeli Defense Forces.
The Vermont-based ice cream maker said these actions were a breach of its contract with Unilever, as it repetitively stymied Ben & Jerry’s social mission and brand integrity and attempted to topple its independent board’s authority.
“Unilever has repeatedly failed to recognize and respect the Independent Board’s primary responsibility over Ben & Jerry’s Social Mission and Brand Integrity, including threatening Ben & Jerry’s personnel should the company speak regarding issues which Unilever prefers to censor,” the lawsuit said.
Ben and Jerry’s has a “nonpartisan social mission that seeks to meet human needs and eliminate injustices in our local, national, and international communities,” according to its website. The company made a public statement in 2020 denouncing the “inhumane police brutality” inflicted on George Floyd and called on the Department of Justice to reinstate policies such as consent decrees to curb police abuses that were rolled back under Donald Trump’s administration.
When Unilever acquired Ben & Jerry’s in 2000, both companies agreed the ice cream manufacturer’s independent board would be free to pursue its social mission, but that the London-based consumer goods company would have the final say on financial and operational matters. At the time, Ben & Jerry’s called the acquisition agreement “unique” and “unprecedented,” as it allowed the company to set up a governance structure that secured its standing as a “values-led company.”
This isn’t the first time tensions have flared between Ben & Jerry’s and Unilever over Israel-Palestine.
The ice cream maker sued its parent company in 2022 for breaching their merger agreement when Unilever sold Ben & Jerry’s Israeli operations to a licensee that would market its products in the Israel-occupied West Bank — a decision that went against the wishes of Ben & Jerry’s independent board.
Ben & Jerry’s sues Unilever claiming it was ‘silenced’ over views on Palestine
Ice cream maker Ben & Jerry’s sued its parent company Unilever in federal court, alleging the consumer packaged goods giant sought to “silence” efforts to speak out on human rights issues surrounding the Israel-Hamas war.
The suit, filed in Manhattan federal court on Wednesday, alleges Unilever violated merger and settlement agreements with Ben & Jerry’s and sought the “unilateral erosion” of the ice cream company’s well-known social justice values through “repeated overreaches.”
“Our heart goes out to all victims of the tragic events in the Middle East,” Unilever said in a statement to Bloomberg Law. “We reject the claims made by B&J’s social mission board, and we will defend our case very strongly.”
The dispute dates back to 2021 when Ben & Jerry’s decided to stop selling its products in the occupied West Bank, where Israel is widely considered to be violating international law.
The decision prompted controversy both in Israel and beyond, with some Unilever shareholders selling off bonds in protest. Investors in Unilever also sued.
The following year, Unilever sought to sell Ben & Jerry’s Israel business to a partner in the region under tweaked branding, a move which the ice cream maker sued to block, arguing it had been done without its consent. Unilever and Ben & Jerry’s settled in late 2022.
Under the terms of the settlement, Ben & Jerry’s said in its suit this week, Unilever affirmed its commitment to “respecting” the ice cream company’s independent board and its “authority over Ben & Jerry’s Social Mission and Brand Integrity.” It’s an arrangement Ben & Jerry’s said is also enshrined in the companies’ merger agreement from the year 2000.
When Hamas invaded Israel last October and war broke out, the relationship between the two companies broke down, according to the suit.
On four occasions, Unilever blocked attempts to speak out, per the complaint.
In 2023, the company allegedly threatened to dismantle the Ben & Jerry’s board and sue individual board members if they issued a statement calling for “peace” and a “ceasefire,” with senior executives Peter ter Kulve and Jeff Eglash allegedly attempting to “intimidate Ben & Jerry’s personnel with professional reprisals.”
The company also reportedly shot down statements supporting the right of campus protesters to speak out about the war in Gaza, as well as allegedly nixing planned calls in 2024 for halting arms sales to Israel and a statement calling for safe passage of Palestinian refugees.
The suit alleges that Unilever opposed the refugee statement, citing bad timing due to a recent Iranian attack on Israel, and “concerns about the continued perception of antisemitism.”
In addition to keeping statements from going public, Unilever also allegedly sought to block portions of $5m Ben & Jerry’s said it was entitled to direct towards human rights organizations under the terms of their 2022 settlement over the West Bank issues.
The suit claims Unilever objected to giving funds to Jewish Voice for Peace, a left-leaning advocacy group that has been critical of Israel, and the San Francisco chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, citing the need for neutrality. The complaint notes that Unilever has chosen sides in other conflicts, such as publicly condemning Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and has allegedly donated to an Israeli organization that works with the government to provide emergency medical services, including to those impacted by the Israel-Hamas war.
Unilever is seeking to spin off or sell Ben & Jerry’s by the end of next year.
Despite a growing trend of corporations speaking out about social issues, public stances about the Israel-Palestine conflict remain highly fraught in the corporate world.
Numerous U.S. states have laws making it illegal for state agencies to work with companies that have called for boycotting, divestment, or sanctions against illegal.
The American Civil Liberties Union argues such laws are “designed to discriminate against disfavored political expression.”
Fake announcement says US supermarket chain dropping Ben & Jerry’s products
Facebook posts feature an image of an announcement from US supermarket chain Publix saying it will no longer carry Ben & Jerry’s because of the ice cream company’s decision to stop sales in occupied Palestinian territories. This is false; Publix says it has not dropped Ben & Jerry’s products, and made no such statement on its website or social media accounts.
“Due to the recent statement by Ben & Jerry’s We will no longer be carrying their products, effective immediately! We stand with Israel!” reads the text of an image in a July 20, 2021 Facebook post that appears to show a Publix announcement.
The post, which was apparently first published on a private account, was shared as a screenshot in several Facebook groups, and by a UK page supporting Israel’s Likud party. Others shared the image on Twitter.
The purported announcement circulated on social media following Ben & Jerry’s July 19 statement saying it would stop selling its products in the Israel-occupied Palestinian territories, namely the West Bank and East Jerusalem, because doing so is “inconsistent with our values.” The move prompted a backlash in Israel and parts of the US.
However, Publix — which did not respond to AFP’s requests for comment by the time of publication — says it does not plan to remove Ben & Jerry’s products.
“While we currently don’t plan to remove Ben & Jerry’s from our stores, we’ll continue evaluating products based on sales,” the company’s customer service Twitter account @PublixHelps wrote in response to questions over the authenticity of the claim.
Publix has also not announced on Twitter or on Facebook that it is ceasing sales of the company’s ice cream, and its webpage dedicated to news releases makes no mention of Ben & Jerry’s.
Various Ben & Jerry’s products are also still available on Publix’s website.
Public pressure
The fake announcement was shared as the company faces public pressure on Publix to ban Ben & Jerry’s products from its stores.
A petition on change.org asking Publix and Winn Dixie, another supermarket chain, to stop selling the ice cream, was signed by more than 450 people at the time of publication.
A search for the words “Publix Israel” on social media monitoring tool CrowdTangle also shows that a Facebook account shared a message encouraging people to email Publix CEO Todd Jones about Ben & Jerry’s in at least 10 different groups related to Florida, where the supermarket chain is headquartered.
On July 20, Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett warned consumer goods giant Unilever, of which Ben & Jerry’s is a subsidiary, that the decision would have “severe consequences.”
The Israeli government has for years been fighting a BDS movement, which calls for boycott, divestment and sanction of the Jewish state over its policies toward Palestinians.