PepsiCo: Difference between revisions
CrazyKidJack (talk | contribs) Changed "methamphetamine" to "Carcinogenic Food Coloring". Pepsi didn't contain meth the drug. It contains a possibly carcinogenic caramel coloring. I don't even know if this should really be in scope for the wiki. |
m Removed cleanup tag. |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{StubNotice}} | {{StubNotice}} | ||
{{CompanyCargo | {{CompanyCargo | ||
|Founded=1898-08-28 | |Founded=1898-08-28 | ||
| Line 8: | Line 7: | ||
|Website=https://www.pepsico.com | |Website=https://www.pepsico.com | ||
|Description=a company that owns products like Pepsi and Lays | |Description=a company that owns products like Pepsi and Lays | ||
}} | }} | ||
==Consumer | <!-- please expand upon this -->'''{{Wplink|PepsiCo|PepsiCo, Inc.}}''' is an American food and beverage corporation. | ||
==Consumer impact summary== | |||
{{Ph-C-CIS}} | {{Ph-C-CIS}} | ||
==Incidents== | ==Incidents== | ||
This is a list of all consumer-protection incidents this company is involved in. Any incidents not mentioned here can be found in the [[:Category:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|{{PAGENAME}} category]]. | |||
===Pepsi runs misleading advertising campaign to give away a Harrier II jet (''1996'')=== | |||
In March 1996, Pepsi began the "Pepsi Stuff" advertising campaign which claimed that you could redeem "Pepsi Points" for a variety of things including and up to a {{Wplink|Harrier jump jet#Second-generation Harriers|Harrier II jet}}. When John Leonard produced enough points to purchase the jet, they refused on the grounds that it was not intended to be taken seriously. Leonard chose to pursue a lengthy legal campaign against Pepsi for the alleged false advertising (see ''{{Wplink|Leonard v. Pepsico, Inc.}}''). | |||
Multiple similar campaigns were performed outside of the United States, with similar results, as outlined in the ''"{{Wplink|Pepsi, Where's My Jet?}}"'' docuseries on [[Netflix]]. | |||
=== | |||
[[File: | ===PepsiCo exposes customers to lead without prior knowledge (''2006'')=== | ||
On 21 April 2006, the California state government announced that PepsiCo was agreeing to a consent judgment over claims of violating the {{Wplink|California Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act}}, alleging that Mexico Pepsi and West Jefferson Mountain Dew had failed to warn Californian consumers that their products contained lead and cadmium.<ref>{{Cite web |author= |title=Attorney General Lockyer Announces Multi-Million Dollar Settlement With Pepsi to Eliminate Lead in Mexican Bottles |url=https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-lockyer-announces-multi-million-dollar-settlement-pepsi |website=California Department of Justice - Office of the Attorney General |date=21 Apr 2006 |access-date=16 May 2026 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120613175743/https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-lockyer-announces-multi-million-dollar-settlement-pepsi |archive-date=13 Jun 2012}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Lockyer |first=Bill |title=''People Of The State Of Ca et al v. Pepsico Inc'', Case No. BC351120 |url=https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/media/prop65-people-pepsi-071806.pdf |website=California Department of Justice - Office of the Attorney General |date=18 July 2006 |access-date=16 May 2026 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20251217040503if_/https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/media/prop65-people-pepsi-071806.pdf |archive-date=17 Dec 2025 |format=PDF}}</ref> | |||
[[File:PepsiCo pep+ program strategy.png|thumb|PepsiCo pep+ program strategy]] | |||
===Hiding how much carcinogenic food coloring in products (''2014—2016'')=== | |||
Thamar Santisteban Cortina separately sued Pepsico and Goya Foods in January 2014 over the products Pepsi, Pepsi One, and Diet Pepsi, allegedly containing excessive amount of 4-methylimidazole (which can cause severe health risks like cancer) without properly informing consumers.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Clark |first=Simon |title=Pepsi, Goya Accused of Hiding Levels of Potentially Dangerous Caramel Color |url=https://www.classaction.org/blog/pepsi-goya-accused-of-hiding-levels-of-potentially-dangerous-caramel-color |website=Classaction |date=27 Jun 2017 |access-date=5 Mar 2026 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260321184924/https://www.classaction.org/blog/pepsi-goya-accused-of-hiding-levels-of-potentially-dangerous-caramel-color |archive-date=21 Mar 2026}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Antell |first=Amanda |title=Class Action Says Pepsi, Malta Goya Contain Cancer-Causing Chemical |url=https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/lawsuit-news/class-action-says-pepsi-malta-goya-contain-cancer-causing-chemical/ |website=Top Class Actions |date=29 Jan 2014 |access-date=5 Mar 2026 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260321184935/https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/lawsuit-news/class-action-says-pepsi-malta-goya-contain-cancer-causing-chemical/ |archive-date=21 Mar 2026}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Warmerdam |first=Elizabeth |title=Class Claims Pepsi Contains Carcinogen |url=https://www.courthousenews.com/class-claims-pepsi-contains-carcinogen/ |website=Courthouse News Service |date=28 Jan 2014 |access-date=5 Mar 2026 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260321184942/https://www.courthousenews.com/class-claims-pepsi-contains-carcinogen/ |archive-date=21 Mar 2026}}</ref> | |||
PepsiCo's motion for a change of venue to the Northern District of California (from Southern) was granted 30 April 2014.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Miller |first=Jeffrey T. |title=''Cortina v. Pepsico, Inc.'' (3:14-cv-00168) |url=https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/2582104/Cortina_v_Pepsico,_Inc |website=PacerMonitor |date=30 Apr 2014 |access-date=16 May 2026 |url-status=live | |||
|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260517060056/https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/2582104/Cortina_v_Pepsico,_Inc |archive-date=17 May 2026}}</ref> It was consolidated with ''Sciortino v. Pepsico, Inc.'' on 20 June 2014.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Chen |first=Edward M. |title=''Cortina v. Pepsico, Inc.'' (4:14-cv-02023) |url=https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/3477660/Cortina_v_Pepsico,_Inc |website=PacerMonitor |date=20 Jun 2014 |access-date=16 May 2026 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/N82Z3 |archive-date=17 May 2026}}</ref> A class action settlement was granted final approval on 30 August 2016.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Chen |first=Edward M. |title=''Sciortino v. Pepsico, Inc.'' (3:14-cv-00478) |url=https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4180619/162/sciortino-v-pepsico-inc/ |website=Court Listener |date=30 Aug 2016 |access-date=16 May 2026 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260517063507/https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4180619/162/sciortino-v-pepsico-inc/ |archive-date=17 May 2026}}</ref> | |||
=== | ===PepsiCo and Walmart sued by FTC for rigging soft drink prices (''2025'')=== | ||
On 17 January 2025, the [[Federal Trade Commission]] filed a lawsuit against PepsiCo and [[Walmart]] for violating the {{Wplink|Robinson-Patman Act}} by allegedly allowing Walmart to sell Pepsi products at lower prices than its competitors.<ref>{{Cite web |author= |title=FTC Sues PepsiCo for Rigging Soft Drink Competition |url=https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2025/01/ftc-sues-pepsico-rigging-soft-drink-competition |website=[[Federal Trade Commission]] |date=17 Jan 2025 |access-date=16 May 2026 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250117172226/https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2025/01/ftc-sues-pepsico-rigging-soft-drink-competition |archive-date=17 Jan 2025}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Schweizer |first=Errol |title=How Walmart And Pepsico Rigged Prices And Supercharged Food Inflation |url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/errolschweizer/2025/12/18/how-walmart-and-pepsico-rigged-prices-and-supercharged-food-inflation/ |website=Forbes |date=18 Dec 2025 |access-date=5 Mar 2026 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260321184951/https://www.forbes.com/sites/errolschweizer/2025/12/18/how-walmart-and-pepsico-rigged-prices-and-supercharged-food-inflation/ |archive-date=21 Mar 2026}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Wood |first=James R. |title=Walmart, Pepsi accused of manipulating prices |url=https://www.consumeraffairs.com/news/walmart-pepsi-accused-of-manipulating-prices-121725.html |website=Consumer Affairs |date=17 Dec 2025 |access-date=21 Mar 2026 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260216144259/https://www.consumeraffairs.com/news/walmart-pepsi-accused-of-manipulating-prices-121725.html |archive-date=16 Feb 2026}}</ref> | |||
On | |||
The lawsuit was dismissed without prejudice by the FTC in a 3-0 vote on 22 May 2025, with FTC Chairman Andrew Ferguson reasoning that "the Biden-Harris FTC rushed to authorize this case just three days before President Trump's inauguration in a nakedly political effort to commit this administration to pursuing little more than a hunch that Pepsi had violated the law."<ref>{{Cite web |author= |title=FTC Dismisses Lawsuit Against PepsiCo |url=https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2025/05/ftc-dismisses-lawsuit-against-pepsico |website=Federal Trade Commission |date=22 May 2025 |access-date=16 May 2026 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250523013634/https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2025/05/ftc-dismisses-lawsuit-against-pepsico |archive-date=23 May 2025}}</ref> | |||
The | |||
=== | ===Lawsuit accuses PepsiCo and Coca-Cola of running campaigns lying about environmental benefits to consumers (''2024'')=== | ||
[[File:PepsiCo post on X about ESG.png|thumb|PepsiCo post on [[X]].]] | |||
On 29 October 2024, Los Angeles County in California filed a lawsuit against PepsiCo and Coca-Cola on 2024 over misleading consumers with a disinformation campaign designed to make consumers believe that their products are environmental friendly — in particular single-use plastic bottles and the efficacy of recycling them.<ref>{{Cite web |last1=Harrison |first1=Dawyn R. |last2=Kuhn |first2=Scott |title=''Los Angeles County v PepsiCo, Inc. and The Coca-Cola Company, et al'' (Case No. 24STCV28450) |url=https://file.lacounty.gov/SDSInter/lac/1169727_FiledPlasticsComplaintAgainstPepsiCoandCoke.pdf |website=County of Los Angeles |date=29 Oct 2024 |access-date=17 May 2026 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250514013345/http://file.lacounty.gov/SDSInter/lac/1169727_FiledPlasticsComplaintAgainstPepsiCoandCoke.pdf |archive-date=14 May 2025 |format=PDF}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |author= |title=LA County Sues Pepsi and Coca-Cola over Plastic Beverage Pollution and Deceiving Public on Plastic Recycling |url=https://lacounty.gov/2024/10/30/la-county-sues-pepsi-and-coca-cola-over-plastic-beverage-pollution-and-deceiving-public-on-plastic-recycling/ |website=County of Los Angeles |date=30 Oct 2024 |access-date=17 May 2026 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20241103190450/https://lacounty.gov/2024/10/30/la-county-sues-pepsi-and-coca-cola-over-plastic-beverage-pollution-and-deceiving-public-on-plastic-recycling/ |archive-date=3 Nov 2024}}</ref> | |||
<ref>{{Cite web |last=Edwards |first=Jessy |title=Pepsi, Coca-Cola untruthful about about single-use plastic waste, lawsuit claims |url=https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/class-action-news/pepsi-coca-cola-untruthful-about-about-single-use-plastic-waste-lawsuit-claims |website=Top Class Actions |date=8 Nov 2024 |access-date=5 Mar 2026 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260321185527/https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/class-action-news/pepsi-coca-cola-untruthful-about-about-single-use-plastic-waste-lawsuit-claims/ |archive-date=21 Mar 2026}}</ref> | |||
The case was removed from {{Wplink|Los Angeles County Superior Court|Los Angeles Superior Court}} to the {{Wplink|United States District Court for the Central District of California|Central District of California}} on 2 December 2024,<ref>{{Cite web |author= |title=''The People of the State of California v. PepsiCo, Inc.'' (2:24-cv-10340) |url=https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69430662/4/the-people-of-the-state-of-california-v-pepsico-inc/ |website=Court Listener |date=2 Dec 2024 |access-date=17 May 2026 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260517222253/https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69430662/4/the-people-of-the-state-of-california-v-pepsico-inc/ |archive-date=17 May 2026}}</ref> before eventually being remanded back to Superior Court on 14 March 2025.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Wu |first=George H. |title=''The People of the State of California v. PepsiCo, Inc.'' (2:24-cv-10340) |url=https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69430662/45/the-people-of-the-state-of-california-v-pepsico-inc/ |website=Court Listener |date=14 Mar 2025 |access-date=17 May 2026 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260517221730/https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69430662/45/the-people-of-the-state-of-california-v-pepsico-inc/ |archive-date=17 May 2026}}</ref> Its current status is unknown as of 17 May 2026. | |||
==Products== | ==Products== | ||
| Line 40: | Line 50: | ||
*[[Coca-Cola]] | *[[Coca-Cola]] | ||
*[[Yum! Brands]] | *[[Yum! Brands]] | ||
*[[Restaurant Brands International | *[[Restaurant Brands International]] | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||
{{ | {{Reflist}} | ||
[[Category:{{PAGENAME}}]] | [[Category:{{PAGENAME}}]] | ||
[[Category:Food and drink companies]] | |||