News">
Ben & Jerry’s Co-Founder To Launch Independent Ice Cream line After Dispute With Unilever
Table of Contents
- 1. Ben & Jerry’s Co-Founder To Launch Independent Ice Cream line After Dispute With Unilever
- 2. A History of Activism and Corporate Conflict
- 3. Watermelon Sorbet: A Symbol of Solidarity
- 4. Past Controversies And Leadership Changes
- 5. The Growing Trend of Corporate Activism
- 6. Frequently Asked Questions About Ben & Jerry’s and Unilever
- 7. How does Unilever’s handling of the Ben & Jerry’s decision align with principles of corporate social obligation?
- 8. Unilever Blocks Ben & Jerry’s Palestine-Themed Ice Cream, Co-Founder Claims
- 9. The Dispute: A Timeline of Events
- 10. Greenfield’s Allegations: What’s Being Claimed?
- 11. Unilever’s Response & Legal battles
- 12. The Boycott,Divestment,and Sanctions (BDS) Movement & Impact
- 13. Implications for Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)
The co-founder of the renowned ice cream brand Ben & Jerry’s has announced plans to independently create a new flavor, following a reported block by its parent company, Unilever, on a concept intended to show support for Palestine. Ben Cohen revealed his intention to proceed with the flavor as part of a personal series dedicated to causes Unilever has restricted the company from publicly endorsing.
A History of Activism and Corporate Conflict
Ben & Jerry’s has long been recognized for its outspoken stance on social issues, consistently addressing political, environmental, and humanitarian concerns, including the complex situation surrounding the Israel-Gaza conflict. However, tensions have been brewing between the ice cream maker and Unilever, which acquired the brand in 2000.
cohen asserts that Unilever, along with its ice cream division magnum-currently undergoing a spin-off-has unlawfully hindered Ben & Jerry’s ability to uphold its core social mission. This dispute escalates a long-standing disagreement between the two entities regarding the extent of corporate influence over the brand’s values.
Watermelon Sorbet: A Symbol of Solidarity
On Tuesday, Cohen detailed his plans in an Instagram video, announcing the creation of a watermelon-flavored sorbet. He invited input from the public regarding the product’s name and potential ingredients. The watermelon carries meaningful symbolism, representing solidarity with Palestinians due to its colors mirroring those of the Palestinian flag – red, green, black, and white.
Cohen explained he is proceeding with the flavor as Ben & Jerry’s was prevented from doing so by Unilever.”I’m doing what they couldn’t,” he stated, emphasizing his commitment to expressing support for “permanent peace in Palestine and repairing the damage that was done there.”
Past Controversies And Leadership Changes
This latest development follows a 2021 decision by Ben & Jerry’s to discontinue sales in areas occupied by Israel. Subsequently, Unilever sold the company’s Israeli operation to a local licensee, allowing continued product availability in the West Bank.
The new dessert line will be developed under Cohen’s activist ice cream brand, Ben’s Best, which was initially established in 2016 to support Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign with a flavor named “Bernie’s Back.” Cohen indicated his intent to introduce further ice cream flavors addressing issues Ben & Jerry’s has been restricted from publicly supporting.
Recent leadership changes also reflect the growing strain. In September, Jerry Greenfield stepped down from Ben & Jerry’s, expressing concerns that the company’s independence had been compromised by Unilever’s limitations on social activism.Cohen previously lamented the impact of the conflict with Unilever on his partner, stating it was “breaking Jerry’s heart”.
| Event | Date |
|---|---|
| Ben & Jerry’s stops sales in occupied territories | 2021 |
| Unilever sells israeli operation to local licensee | 2021 |
| Jerry Greenfield steps down from Ben & Jerry’s | September 2025 |
| Ben Cohen announces independent ice cream line | October 2025 |
Did You Know? Watermelon seeds were once carried by Palestinians fleeing their homes during the 1948 Arab-Israeli conflict, becoming a symbol of their displaced identity.
Pro tip: Supporting businesses that align with yoru values is a powerful way to advocate for social change.
The Growing Trend of Corporate Activism
The Ben & Jerry’s situation highlights a broader trend of increasing consumer expectation for brands to take a stand on social and political issues.While this can foster strong brand loyalty,it also opens companies up to potential backlash and commercial risks. Balancing profit with purpose remains a central challenge for modern businesses.
Experts predict more corporate activism as younger generations, particularly Millennials and Gen Z, prioritize ethical consumerism. A Nielsen report from 2018 showed that 73% of global consumers would change their consumption habits to reward companies demonstrating commitment to social and environmental issues.
Frequently Asked Questions About Ben & Jerry’s and Unilever
- What is the main issue between Ben & jerry’s and Unilever? The dispute centers around Unilever’s alleged restrictions on Ben & Jerry’s ability to express its social and political views.
- What does the watermelon symbolize in relation to Palestine? The watermelon’s colors closely resemble the Palestinian flag, making it a symbol of solidarity with the Palestinian cause.
- What is Ben’s Best? Ben’s Best is Ben Cohen’s independent activist ice cream brand, originally created to support Bernie Sanders.
- Why did Jerry Greenfield step down from Ben & Jerry’s? concerns about the company’s compromised independence following Unilever’s curbing of social activism led to his resignation.
- Will the new ice cream flavor be sold under the Ben & Jerry’s brand? no, the watermelon sorbet will be produced independently under Cohen’s Ben’s best brand.
- Is corporate activism a growing trend? Yes, there’s a growing expectation for brands to take stances on social and political issues due to shifting consumer preferences.
- Where can I learn more about the Israel-Palestine conflict? resources like The Council on Foreign Relations provide in-depth analysis and background information.
What are your thoughts on companies taking political stances? Do you think brands should use their platforms to advocate for social causes? Share your opinion in the comments below!
Unilever Blocks Ben & Jerry’s Palestine-Themed Ice Cream, Co-Founder Claims
The Dispute: A Timeline of Events
The ongoing conflict between Unilever and Ben & Jerry’s regarding the sale of ice cream in occupied Palestinian territories has escalated, with Ben & Jerry’s co-founder, Jerry Greenfield, claiming Unilever is actively blocking the company’s attempts to honor its commitment to end sales in these regions. This dispute centers around Ben & Jerry’s 2021 decision to stop selling its products in Israeli settlements in the West Bank, a move that sparked significant controversy and legal challenges.
Here’s a breakdown of key events:
* July 2021: Ben & Jerry’s announces it will no longer sell its ice cream in Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories,citing inconsistency with its values. This decision did not include ending sales within Israel itself.
* August 2021: Unilever, Ben & Jerry’s parent company, publicly distances itself from the decision, stating it was made independently by the ice cream brand.
* September 2022: Unilever sells Ben & Jerry’s autonomous board rights, but retains ownership of the brand’s business internationally.
* October 2023: Reports emerge that Unilever is attempting to override Ben & Jerry’s commitment, seeking to sell the brand’s business in Israel to a local licensee.
* October 2025: Jerry Greenfield publicly alleges Unilever is actively obstructing Ben & Jerry’s efforts to uphold its original decision, effectively forcing continued sales in occupied territories.
Greenfield’s Allegations: What’s Being Claimed?
Jerry Greenfield, in recent statements, asserts that Unilever is deliberately undermining Ben & Jerry’s ethical stance. He claims Unilever’s actions are a direct contradiction of the spirit of the 2021 proclamation and represent a prioritization of profit over principles. Specifically,Greenfield alleges:
* Contractual Interference: Unilever is using its control over the brand’s international business to pressure Ben & Jerry’s into allowing sales in the settlements.
* Licensee Selection: The proposed Israeli licensee was chosen specifically to circumvent Ben & Jerry’s restrictions and continue sales in the contested territories.
* Legal Challenges: Unilever is pursuing legal avenues to force Ben & Jerry’s to comply with its plans, despite the brand’s objections.
These claims have ignited a firestorm of criticism, with pro-Palestinian activists accusing Unilever of complicity in the Israeli occupation.The situation highlights the complexities of corporate social responsibility and the challenges of maintaining ethical standards in politically sensitive regions.
Unilever’s Response & Legal battles
Unilever maintains that its actions are within its legal rights as the owner of the Ben & Jerry’s brand.The company argues that the original decision to halt sales in settlements was a unilateral move by ben & Jerry’s independent board and that Unilever has the authority to manage the brand’s global operations.
Key points in unilever’s defense include:
* Contractual obligations: Unilever asserts it has contractual obligations to maximize shareholder value, which includes expanding the brand’s reach and sales.
* Independent Board Rights: The sale of independent board rights in 2022 clarified Unilever’s control over the brand’s business internationally.
* Legal Proceedings: Unilever initiated legal proceedings to enforce its right to sell the brand’s business in Israel, arguing Ben & Jerry’s was exceeding its authority.
The legal battle is ongoing,with Ben & Jerry’s seeking to prevent Unilever from overriding its original decision. The case raises important questions about the limits of corporate control and the extent to which companies can be held accountable for their ethical commitments.
The Boycott,Divestment,and Sanctions (BDS) Movement & Impact
The controversy surrounding Ben & Jerry’s and Unilever has become a focal point for the Boycott,Divestment,and Sanctions (BDS) movement,a Palestinian-led campaign advocating for international pressure on Israel to comply with international law.
* Increased scrutiny: the situation has drawn increased scrutiny to Unilever’s business practices and its relationship with Israel.
* Calls for Boycott: Pro-Palestinian activists have called for a boycott of Unilever products in response to the company’s actions.
* Public Pressure: The controversy has generated significant public pressure on Unilever to reconsider its approach and respect Ben & Jerry’s original commitment.
The BDS movement views the case as a test of whether corporations will prioritize ethical considerations over political and economic pressures. The outcome of the legal battle and Unilever’s ultimate decision could have significant implications for the movement’s broader goals.
This dispute serves as a stark example of the challenges companies face when attempting to navigate complex political and ethical issues. It raises critical questions about:
* Authenticity of CSR: Is a company’s commitment to social responsibility genuine, or merely a marketing tactic?
* parent Company Influence: How much influence should a parent company exert over the ethical decisions of its subsidiaries?
* Shareholder vs. Stakeholder Value: How should companies balance the interests of shareholders with the broader interests of stakeholders, including consumers, employees, and communities?
The Ben & Jerry
