The internet is no stranger to debate. Heated arguments over whether Kim and Pete were meant to be, which influencer wore it best, and if Harry Styles and Olivia Wilde are in a fake relationship dominate our headlines. Many of us have become accustomed to the outlandish nature of internet arguments, but few could have predicted who exactly would be stoking the flames of a recent online controversy: the green M&M. Like many other instances of internet obsession, though, this too was a distraction from deeper troubles.
In February 2022, Mars Inc., producer of M&M chocolates, announced that they were rebranding the iconic, human-like M&M characters that have long graced television screens across the world. Each M&M was assigned a “fresh personality” as part of a controversial marketing campaign that aimed to create “a sense of belonging and community” that better reflects contemporary America. Orange, historically defined by his anxious nature, is now going to embrace his worries, becoming an “avatar of our collective anxieties” so that he can better relate to Gen-Z. Yellow morphed into an eternal optimist, whose wise musings represent “the world as it should be.” Most contentious, however, was Ms. Green’s transformation. Mars renamed her “Green,” dropping the “Ms” to focus more on empowerment rather than gender. Moreover, while Green was once branded as sensual, even modeling for numerous Sports Illustrated back covers, her makeover saw her trade her fashionable boots for practical sneakers to emphasize her “confidence” rather than sex appeal.
Given that the candy characters are both cultural icons and fundamentally humanoid, it seems intuitive that they be rebranded to more accurately reflect the modern human experience, one that champions empowerment, justice, and vulnerability like the new M&M’s do.
Despite this, dialogue spaces from Twitter to talk shows lit aflame with angry individuals bemoaning what they perceived to be yet another example of unnecessary “corporate wokeness.” Notably, political pundit Tucker Carlson took to his talk show, Tucker Carlson Tonight, whining the new candy characters were “less sexy,” to the point that “you wouldn’t want to have a drink with any one of them.” While it is tempting to dismiss a man who considers M&M’s viable candidates for a date as ridiculous and irrelevant, doing so ignores an important reality: People listen. Carlson’s show was the second-most-watched cable news show in the second quarter of 2022. Even as he makes outlandish claims, Carlson’s viewers continue to listen; the problems that he creates become the objects of their attention, and when crusaders against ‘wokeness’ rage, issues of true substance are neglected.
Even the other side of the political aisle, typically receptive to shifts toward inclusivity, came out against the M&M rebrand, claiming that it distracted from more salient issues, such as voting rights or healthcare. While their points are well-intentioned, they too miss the mark: Simply because there exist issues of greater weight does not mean that minor steps toward diversity and inclusivity are unnecessary, irrelevant, or pernicious.
What is harmful, though, is when people waste breath debating the legitimacy of changes such as Mars Inc.’s rebranding, when the very subject of their criticism may be committing much more destructive sins. Twitter users failed to realize that by spending time lambasting the redesigned candies, they themselves contributed to a hyper-fixation on a matter that does not actually require much dialogue. The superficial nature of these internet conversations — if they can be so named — reveals how the internet’s raging jabber fires are burning generative discourse.
While hordes of people readily engaged in the culture war surrounding the green M&M, far less were aware that Mars Inc., just months before in 2021, had been sued over allegations of forced child labor. Eight Malian adults claimed that they were trafficked as children and used as slave labor on cocoa farms in Côte d’Ivoire, a country on the southern coast of West Africa. The lawsuit, filed by human rights organization International Rights Advocates, alleges that the defendants — Mars Inc. and several other of the world’s largest chocolate companies — “‘knowingly profited’ from the illegal work of children.” In doing so, the defendants actively participated in “aiding and abetting the illegal enslavement of thousands of children,” some of whom were tragically kidnapped or sold by their parents.
The companies were also accused of misleading the public when cocoa industry representatives entered into the 2001 Harkin-Engel Protocol, a clearly delineated “problem-solving approach” intended to “credibly” eliminate the use of child labor in cocoa production. The move signaled that the cocoa industry was “taking responsibility” and working to eradicate the dangerous, unethical labor practices in its supply chain. In reality, the protocol was deeply problematic. The policies, which were non-binding and held no legal weight, called for the industry to self-regulate, apparently subscribing to the belief that suggesting those perpetuating human rights abuses stop would be effective. Not only was the protocol unenforceable and ineffective, it worked against itself by casting a misleading appearance that concealed the truth about the industry’s labor practices.
This was not the first time that Mars Inc. had participated in a cover-up of its labor practices. Robert Hodson, a California citizen, sued Mars. Inc because they did not disclose the “potentiality of child slave labor” in their supply chain on their products’ packaging. Hodson claimed that he would never have purchased Mars Inc. chocolate had he been aware of them. While a judge agreed that the labor practices were “reprehensible,” they dismissed the case in 2016 on the basis that the practices were not relevant to the product’s potential “safety risks and defects,” and thus did not need to be disclosed. The judge also reasoned that since supply chain information was available on the company’s website, its exclusion from chocolate labels was not “substantially injurious to consumers.”
Upon scrutiny, though, the human rights information included on Mars Inc.’s website is a flagrant avoidance of the truth. The website does not explicitly disclose the potentiality of child slave labor in Mars Inc.’s cocoa production, only admitting that forced and child labor “may pose the most severe risk” in their extended (rather than direct) supply chains. Instead, the website touts the variety of ways that Mars Inc. is ardently combating the abuses they claim “may” exist.
The horrific nature of the labor practices in Mars Inc.’s supply chains and the manufacturer’s immoral efforts to conceal these human rights abuses becomes increasingly outrageous when one remembers that, while labor injustice got almost no media attention, the internet instead exploded over a green M&M. Sure, Mars Inc.’s move towards a more inclusive characterization of its candy may have been both positive and polarizing, but instead of engaging in mindless debates over a natural byproduct of modernization, people should focus on meaningful issues with a realizable impact.
Why are we allowing superficial wokeness culture clashes to detach our society from facing atrocities? Why can the internet babble so effectively obscure worthwhile conversation? From Tucker Carlson to Twitter users, why are so many individuals spending their precious time and energy on flashy headlines rather than meaningful discussions?
When processing similar scandals regarding human rights, it is easy to point the finger at the large corporation, and, to a certain extent, that is a justifiable course of action. Mars Inc. is actively covering up its nasty relationship with child slave labor, and fighting legal battles to continue to do so. However, to unequivocally place total blame on Mars Inc. would be to divorce ourselves from our responsibilities as consumers and citizens. We must resist the temptation to embattle ourselves in only the entertaining or salacious conversations, and instead force ourselves to dissect issues of substance. This is sometimes difficult and often laborious, but far more worthwhile. After all, once we finally commit to being thoughtful pursuers of the truth, not only will companies like Mars Inc. stop getting away with their cover-ups, but we will no longer be their accomplices.
