Innocent drinks

[Biscuitsanddoombar]

So another brand proves that they’re not keen on women having thoughts

We make healthy drinks. We don't want to see any pictures of your banana bread

Surely that description goes against trading standards.

@HettieMillia

We make healthy drinks. We don't want to see any pictures of your banana bread

Surely that description goes against trading standards.

Agree - realistically the biggest threat to their profitability is more accurate food labelling.

What exactly is the logic of making such a big fuss about this?

Someone tweets at a brand. Brand does what they're told to do and unfollows someone.

Can anyone here explain to me what hectoring Innocent Drinks social media manager will honestly achieve? So far they have continued to unfollow the person they unfollowed and they have drummed up a huge amount of brand awareness by leveraging this attention into a statement of essentially "Badness is bad. We are goodies."

So something incredibly minor has gained them massive kudos in the outrage factory and the original unfollowed person...remains unfollowed.

Literally no one's viewpoint has been changed by any of this. But they may well sell more orange juice this week.

Another company have just done exactly the same thing to Maggie in response to one Twitter poster. I've never heard of Kiva, but they have over 500k followers. They have also tagged her in their response so there will no doubt be a fresh torrent of abuse heading her way.

I don't know about you, MondayYogurt, but I'd prefer to know if the brands I was giving money to are run by ageist misogynists who bully women for woke points. And make my personal purchasing choices accordingly.

@Nothappytohelp

Another company have just done exactly the same thing to Maggie in response to one Twitter poster. I've never heard of Kiva, but they have over 500k followers. They have also tagged her in their response so there will no doubt be a fresh torrent of abuse heading her way.

I used to make loans through kiva, but leaned the local companies lending your money charge the borrowers interest, which kind of defeated the purpose for me.

So are they going through Maggie's followers to find corporates and demanding they unfollow her? It's totally shitty if so. These purity spirals, where do they end?

I'd prefer to know if the brands I was giving money to are run by ageist misogynists who bully women for woke points.

This.

And there's a thread full of people who were happily buying this product and have had their viewpoint changed.

But interesting you felt the need to come and try to tell women that nobody cares about misogyny towards women and they may as well accept it as the natural order. Bit gynephobic really. Not much of an ally to women.

"What exactly is the logic of making such a big fuss about this?

"Someone tweets at a brand. Brand does what they're told to do and unfollows someone."

Well, that's kind of it, isn't it? Why should anyone on social media 'do what they're told to do' by anyone else? And why is who they follow anybody else's business?

I'm seeing this play out at the moment with people trying to force others in the industry to unfollow James Dreyfus. It's like a cult.

@Nothappytohelp

Another company have just done exactly the same thing to Maggie in response to one Twitter poster. I've never heard of Kiva, but they have over 500k followers. They have also tagged her in their response so there will no doubt be a fresh torrent of abuse heading her way.

Kiva? Fuckers.

That is truly awful, as if I withdraw money from them it's taking it away from the people they lend to.

Well, I'll find another charity that does similar.

*What exactly is the logic of making such a big fuss about this?

Someone tweets at a brand. Brand does what they're told to do and unfollows someone.

Can anyone here explain to me what hectoring Innocent Drinks social media manager will honestly achieve? So far they have continued to unfollow the person they unfollowed and they have drummed up a huge amount of brand awareness by leveraging this attention into a statement of essentially "Badness is bad. We are goodies."

So something incredibly minor has gained them massive kudos in the outrage factory and the original unfollowed person...remains unfollowed.

Literally no one's viewpoint has been changed by any of this. But they may well sell more orange juice this week*

So when women are bullied and vilified for standing up for their rights, you think everyone should turn a blind eye, shrug their shoulders and carry on regardless? Nah. That's not for me I'm afraid.

Also don't agree with your last sentence at all.

I think Kiva seem to have backtracked; their tweet has been deleted?

I've been a member for years and really like the idea. But not happy to support anyone who'd bully a woman like that .

Brand does what they're told to do and unfollows someone
Eh, so if I tweet them to (i dunno I'm thinking on the fly here)
Stand on there heads whilst sending tweets they should do just that?
Stick up for women, the becunted kind, by giving to Vancouver rape shelter, they should do that.
Just because I told them to. That's some power I have.

Well, I'll find another charity that does similar

Maggie mentioned CARE. Maybe need to check their woke credentials first though. But certainly won't be donating to Kiva anymore.

Care look good, but I liked the loan-to-help model particularly.

Literally no one's viewpoint has been changed by any of this. But they may well sell more orange juice this week.

You are probably right but their actions are depressing.

However, I supposed Innocent's tenuous grasp of the issues isn't surprising given their fantasy based marketing strategy:

"pomegranate magic
This recipe is a bit special. We've squeezed three of the world's finest superfruits into it, a combination of pomegranate, blueberry and acai."

But if you check the ingredients in a 250ml bottle, 33g is sugar and even if you believe that açai berries are a super food, you only get 1.75 ml of açai berry.

Care look good, but I liked the loan-to-help model particularly.

Is lendwithcare also care? Trying to figure it out. They seem to have that model.

The thing is, it attracts unwelcome scrutiny to a brand.

Innocent are a market leader. They are everywhere. My kids quite like their drinks, although they're just as happy with any old smoothie. Innocent were selling their crap to us. I was buying it quite regularly & not giving it much thought.

Now, I'm happy to buy elsewhere or make my own, no big deal or inconvenience to me, because they're misogynistic ageist bullying fuckwits.

What I didn't know, before they poked that particular hornets' nest & I read this thread, is that they're owned by coke & have a frankly horrible level of sugar.

That's two more reasons why I'd be less disposed to buy their product again.

& I've had a passing conversation with one mate today, who couldn't give a scoot about who they follow on twitter but had dimly picked up that there was a bit of a hooha going on. So she asked me, because she knows that I'm into 'all that feminism stuff'.

She still could not care less about twitter. Or feminism. But we were both surprised at the sugar content, which neither of us had previously given much thought to, & she's also decided not to buy them anymore - because now she's aware, she won't buy them because they're not the healthy choice she thought they were.

It's a funny marketing strategy; to piss off the women who buy the stuff & talk to people.

I've found some alternatives!

www.quora.com/What-are-some-good-alternatives-to-Kiva?share=1

Good find 👍

Well, thanks, Innocent, you have in the most roundabout way possible prompted me to donate $25 to help a midwife in Ghana with her college course fees.

"What I didn't know, before they poked that particular hornets' nest & I read this thread, is that they're owned by coke & have a frankly horrible level of sugar."

Something similar happened with Flora. The scrutiny caused people who'd been blithely baking with the stuff to read the ingredients and... make healthier choices.

The thing is, it attracts unwelcome scrutiny to a brand

Exactly this. And to the outrageous sugar content and the coca-cola link I will add what I discovered, on the most cursory of searches, about their gender pay gap.

I have no idea about the corporate credentials of most of the brands I put into my trolley on a dash round the supermarket, but now I know that Innocent have a Mean "gender" pay gap of 60%* in relation to bonuses, I can't unknow it. I won't forget. It'll be right there, like a word association thing when I see their lurid sugar-laden smoothies.

And because I know that, I can also work out that, behind the smarmy, self-congratulatory statement they put out there will probably be many female employees at Innocent who feel belittled and furious by what the company have done, but have absolutely zero chance of being able to speak up and keep their jobs, because - as that 60% "gender" bonus pay gap tells us - it's the chaps who are in charge.

I agree that it's unlikely that anyone will have had their minds changed by what's happened. Last week I loathed misogynist wokescold bullies and I still do now, while MondayYogurt was presumably fine with them then and now. But at least those who don't like them can spot them more easily. And those who work for them and can't speak up for fear of losing their jobs have other women to do it for them.

• by "gender" pay gap I think we all know I mean sex. I'll bet my house there's no transmen on the board.

Totally agree, absinthe.