Reference no: EM131790254

After graduating from Ohio State, Keisha got a job in the marketing and public relations department at a small soda company called Smith’s Sodas. Smith’s Sodas specializes in high-quality fruit-flavored soft drinks with unique flavors such as pomegranate, raspberry, blueberry, and coconut. The company had great plans for the future. In ten years Smith’s Sodas wanted to become a competitor to its larger rivals, Pepsi and Coca-Cola. The company sold sodas with lower calories than its rivals and offered them in a variety of flavors. However, the product was only half the battle. The rest was up to the marketing department to promote the sodas as being superior to the competition. Recently, Keisha was called into her supervisor’s office and assigned a new project. She would take the lead in a marketing initiative that promoted a new feature meant to appeal to the eco-conscious consumer: biodegradable packaging. One of the company’s suppliers came up with a soda bottle made with a new biodegradable plastic manufactured with plant materials. Keisha was told the supplier struggled to develop this plastic for years and Smith’s Sodas was staking much of its credibility on developing an image as an environmentally-friendly organization. Keisha immediately began learning about the plastic and writing up press releases to send to local news stations. She put in long hours working on a marketing campaign touting the product’s sustainability and how much better it is for the environment. She stressed the fact that the plastic should be composted rather than simply thrown in the trash to biodegrade properly. A few days ago Keisha received a call from a local reporter. “I’ve heard all of the hype concerning these biodegradable bottles your company is using. I wanted to test just how biodegradable this plastic really is. I contacted scientists at the local university to test its biodegradability. They tested the bottle under ten different conditions with different types of soil. Only four out of the ten tests resulted in the plastic degrading to any major extent.” When Keisha hung up the phone, she decided to investigate whether the reporter’s claims were accurate. After two days of phone calls, she finally contacted someone who had been involved in the actual development of the plastic. “Yes, it’s true the plastic only degrades under certain conditions,” he informed her. “But that’s still better than a lot of other plastics.” Keisha approached her manager, Louis, to discuss the issue. Louis did not understand Keisha’s concern. “I don’t see what the problem is, Keisha, other than the fact that this reporter is trying to cause trouble. As long as the plastic biodegrades under certain natural conditions, then we are fine.” “Yes, but Louis, our claims made it seem the bottles degrade fairly easily, when in reality people must compost them. Even then they only degrade under certain conditions. Isn’t this a type of greenwashing?” Louis frowned at the mention of greenwashing. “Keisha, the term biodegradable is vague. We have a supplier, and it is not our responsibility to prove the packaging is biodegradable. We are not being deceitful, and it is up to the consumer to know how to dispose of the package so it degrades properly. We can’t control what happens to the product after the consumer buys it. Many may simply toss it into the garbage.” “What happens if the reporter publishes her findings?” Keisha asked. Louis looked adamant. “We are not lying when we say the plastic is biodegradable. Besides, most companies have to rely on supplier claims. I don’t see any reason why we need to change our marketing claims.”

1. Are Smith’s Sodas’ marketing claims accurate and truthful?

2. Discuss the justifications Louis uses to argue for the truthfulness of the company’s marketing claims

3. Assume there is a news story questioning the sustainability of Smith’s Sodas packaging. How should Keisha respond?