Recently, our rival in “the state up north” made a rather responsible decision regarding beverage sales on its campuses. At the beginning of this year, the University of Michigan officially banned sales of Coca-Cola products, joining a number of other schools which have implemented similar policies. This is the latest victory for the Stop Killer Coke campaign, which has established a presence on more than 100 college campuses nationwide.
Many here at Coca-Cola University, I mean Ohio State University, might wonder what the fuss is about. After all, it’s only a drink, who cares as long as it tastes good, right? And besides that, Coca-Cola has a track record of being a steadfast supporter of this university and its student body. Everyone surely appreciates Coke’s willingness to provide free beverages to student organizations. And how could anyone forget Coke’s $200,000 donation to delay reconstruction of the Oval until summer quarter of 2004?
Though Coke enjoys seemingly universal support from students, staff and faculty at OSU (except for me), the corporation has been assailed by labor, environmental and human-rights activists. In Colombia, labor-rights advocates have charged Coca-Cola with being linked to right-wing paramilitary groups that have murdered several union leaders working in Coke bottling facilities. Coca-Cola executives have repeatedly denied these allegations, suggesting that they are misguided attempts smear that image of Coke as a responsible global citizen.
Unfortunately for Coke, allegations of gross misconduct extend far beyond the borders of Colombia. Their actions in India highlight the ways in which Coke has caused considerable environmental degradation. Coke’s extensive groundwater extraction has caused severe water shortages in a number of communities and their bottling facilities have increasingly polluted sources of groundwater. On top of that, Coke tried to pass off its toxic waste to farmers as a supposed fertilizer and has also sold beverages contaminated by high levels of pesticides.
Although it should be very apparent by now that Coke has an appalling human rights record, some might assume that any action to defy Coke is essentially irrelevant. Despite the continual efforts of like-minded individuals at various colleges and universities, some believe little can be done to cause drastic change in corporate policies. This assertion is precisely why it is important to view the example of Coca-Cola as a microcosm of a much larger debate regarding globalization. Specifically, it relates to the issues of corporate accountability and consumer responsibility.
Large, multi-national corporations must be made more accountable and sensitive to human rights and labor standards. They should be pressured to act according to their rhetoric of being responsible citizens in a globalizing world. As of now, this remains nothing more than hollow rhetoric, used for the sole purpose of manipulating consumers into believing corporations are benign entities.
As consumers, it is necessary to increase our awareness of corporate activities and play a more proactive role in our purchasing decisions. The mentality that “every time you buy something, you vote with your dollar” needs to become more prevalent. It is too easy to resign oneself to the notion that it is better to wait for regulations to be eventually imposed on corporations. Consumers organizing on a grassroots level can truly put enough pressure on both governments and corporations to implement change. It all begins, however, with people becoming more aware and responsible in their role as consumer.
So, next time you’re about to drink an ice cold Coca-Cola, take a second to remember those Colombian union leaders that were brutally murdered. Maybe the aluminum can’s bright red color will evoke images of the blood these workers bled as they died.
Rajeev Ravisankar is a senior in political science and international studies. He can be reached for comment at [email protected].
