Killer Coke: the campaign against Coca-Cola
Coca-Cola,”the largest distributor and marketer of non-alcoholic beverage concentrates and syrups in the world”, is facing challenges from society. A special interest group called “Campaign to stop Killer Coke” accuses Coco-Cola of practicing illegal and immoral methods in order to generate profit. By protesting, the Campaign to stop Killer Coke arouses a great amount of criticism of Coca-Cola from different sectors of society. This whole event was sparked by the murder of an employee at a Coca-Cola owned plant in Colombia. The victim was named Isidro Segundo Gil and was killed by the paramilitary of Colombia. After his death, Mosquera- the manager of the plant and an associate with the paramilitary - threatened the employees and demanded they resign from the union. The Campaign to Stop Killer Coke now is feeling sorry for Isidro Segundo Gil over this tragedy that should never have happened, and is rebuking Coca-Cola strongly for its wrongdoing. On the other side, Coca-Cola is trying to defend itself by neglecting the facts and reaffirming its “highest standards of ethical conduct and business practices”. Meanwhile, besides these two major players … the Coca-Cola Company and the Campaign to Stop Killer Coke … governments, shareholders, employees, students, public critics and other organizations also play a role in this event. Considering this incident, it is interesting to find out how the whole society works together to define pluralism. There is no single power which can easily manipulate others. At the same time, every single person or organization is completely free to monitor each other. Under this pluralistic environment, it will not be hard to generate a social problem by undesirable thoughts or standpoints Typically, in this case, because of a lack of satisfaction with Coca-Cola’s reaction to its wrongdoing in Colombia, the public has generated much criticism of the company. Moreover, we can also find some traces of a knowledge-based economy. Nowadays, the public is more demanding of a new relationship among managers and employees. It should urge the company to be more socially responsible.
“In order to attract and retain sought-after and mobile talent, companies must become more committed to ensuring a high quality of life for workers—this requires investing in the social aspects of the community.”
Another important issue from this event is the social responsibility of a company. Should Coca-Cola take responsibility for the society? The answer is obviously, ”Yes”. A company such as Coca-Cola should take an “obligation to maximize its positive impact and minimize its negative effects in being a contributing member to society with concern for society’s long-run needs and wants.” In conclusion, the Coca-Cola issue give us a comprehensive understanding of how different sectors of a society monitor and interact with each other.
In 1940, the Coca-Cola Colombia, a “wholly-owned subsidiary”, was founded in Medellin. The headquarters of the Coca-Cola Company has full responsibility for this subsidiary’s major decisions. There are two bottling companies which produce Coca-Cola beverages and which were involved in the Killer Coke incident. Bedida y Alimento de Uraba (Bebidas) was a company managed by Richard Kirby and Richard Kielland. The other bottling company is Panamerican which was fully acquired by Coca-Cola Colombia in 2003. The tragedy happened in the two companies’ bottling plant in Uraba. Because of the fight between communist guerrillas and paramilitaries, Uraba is one of the most violent regions in Colombia. The communist guerrilla group was an armed opposition group against the current government of Colombia; on the other hand, the paramilitary was founded to withstand the communist group in order to protect the stability of society and the political system. Instead of the...