The 9 Greatest Soda Controversies Of All Time

In 1767, clergyman and scientist Joseph Priestly invented carbonated water, a key element of soda. It's hard to imagine that he, or anyone, for that matter, could have guessed that soda would one day become one of the most popular drinks in the world. According to September 2024 figures from Statista, soft drinks are a trillion-dollar industry. New soda flavors are constantly being created, not to mention trends like dirty soda, which has a very Mormon origin.

But there's a less sweet side to our favorite carbonated drinks. Often criticized for their high sugar content, sodas are no strangers to controversy. Beyond the beverages themselves, the soft drink industry also has its share of issues and scandals. Some sodas have stirred up controversies that stand out from the pack. These incidents have marked different soft drink companies and brands, leaving bad feelings, lies, and even deaths in their wake. Here are the 9 greatest soda controversies of all time.

The story goes that Atlanta pharmacist John Stith Pemberton was the first person to invent anything like Coca-Cola, which he began to sell in 1886. Although Coke has a closely guarded recipe, it was actually inspired by another drink. Le vin Mariani (Mariani wine) was created by Angelo Mariani in Corsica in 1863. A health tonic that contained wine, cocaine, brandy, and sugar, it had fans around the globe, including A-listers like Queen Victoria, Mark Twain, and even Pope Leo XIII, who served as a sort of celebrity endorser of the drink. You could say that Mariani wine was nearly as popular in its time as Coca-Cola is today! But its success faded, and by the mid-1960's the original product was no longer sold.  

Famous as Mariani wine once was, it's hard to find any physical traces of it that predate the invention of Coca-Cola. A bottle in the National Museum of American History's collection, for instance, only dates to 1914. Then, in 2014, someone found a bottle in Corsica that dates to 1880, six years before Coke was invented. The bottle's contents were analyzed by the CNRS, a respected national scientific organization in France, which found that the formula was close to Coca-Cola. Further evidence that Pemberton was inspired by Mariani Wine is that his first soda company was called Pemberton's French Coca Wine. 

The (re)discovery that Coca-Cola was inspired by Mariani Wine (which has re-branded as Coca Mariani) caused shockwaves in the French press, but far less of a commotion in the U.S. Still, many websites (including the National Museum of American History) and sources from both countries now acknowledge the connection. That said, Mariani Wine isn't currently mentioned on Coca Cola's official website.

Most parents are wary when it comes to letting their kids drink soda. So, when Jolt Cola was released in 1985, its slogan "all the sugar and twice the caffeine"  made many '80's moms and dads forbid their kids from drinking it.  On the other hand, Jolt Cola wasn't a total failure among adults, but that didn't keep this proto-energy drink from ups and downs, including being discontinued and then being re-released twice over the years. 

As of the time of writing, Jolt was slotted to come back to stores nationwide for a third time, and this time, it had a chance to be a hit. In December 2024, CNN reported that energy drinks were currently more lucrative than sodas. The new version of Jolt was set to be marketed as such, with a bigger size, improved taste, and the addition of healthy ingredients like nootropics and Vitamin B. The rebooted Jolt Cola will be sugar-free this time around , but its once-controversial caffeine content of about 70 milligrams per can will now be amped up to 200 milligrams. 

This may sound excessive, but in December 2024, The U.S. Sun reported that most energy drinks on the market today contain anywhere from 150 to 350 milligrams of caffeine, which, as you might have noticed, is far more than the controversial dose found in the original Jolt Cola. The drink's former controversy may also work in its favor. Aaron Singerman, founder of Redcon1, the company that's relaunching the drink, thinks that one of the biggest consumer groups it will appeal to is fellow former '80's kids who weren't allowed to drink it back in the day. 

In 2013, Mountain Dew teamed up with hip hop star Tyler, The Creator for a series of three commercials. The ads were trying to be unusual and outlandish, perfectly adhering to the Mountain Dew brand, which at the time was especially associated with "extreme" sports and actions — what fans would call "doing the Dew". Unfortunately, though, the ads unexpectedly veered into racism and misogyny rather than humor. 

In the commercials, a woman is essentially terrorized by a Mountain Dew-loving goat, voiced by Tyler, The Creator. The commercial that elicited the most complaints features the woman, who's been severely beaten by the goat, checking out a police lineup comprised entirely of Black men and the aforementioned goat. The goat repeatedly threatens the woman, who ultimately runs away screaming "I can't do it!", which was probably intended to be a play on the drink's "Do the Dew" slogan. The commercial immediately faced criticism from consumers and activists, including Boyce Watkins, who dubbed it "arguably the most racist commercial in history" (via NPR). Others have pointed out that the ad was not only racist, but also misogynistic, as it portrayed a beaten woman's fear and pain as funny.  It turns out the ads were extreme — extremely misguided and tone deaf. Mountain Dew owner PepsiCo removed the commercials from all of its online channels, and issued an apology. 

In the 2010's, New York City Mayor Micheal Bloomberg announced a radical move to reduce obesity in the city: banning the sale of soda containers of over 16 oz. By 2012, New York City's Board of Health had approved the measure and was about to vote it into office, despite many residents' protests. Regardless of what you think about health and portion sizes, it's hard to argue with Eliot Hoff, head of an organization called New Yorkers for Beverage Choices, who, in a CNN interview, called for "...sensible solutions to the obesity issue that focus on a comprehensive approach to tackle an extremely complex problem," adding, "New Yorkers are smart enough to decide for themselves what to eat and drink." 

Ultimately, a judge struck down the measure, though not because he necessarily agreed with Hoff. His concern was that the proposed restrictions were complicated to enforce since there were a number of exceptions, including grocery stores and convenience stores like 7-Eleven, home of the (in)famous Big Gulp. In addition to this, New Yorkers could still buy smaller sized sodas in bulk. The law was also vague enough to have possibly impacted coffee orders at places like Starbucks and Dunkin Donuts, since it technically applied to any beverage that contained sugar, even sugar added by a barista. Today New Yorkers are free to consume as much soda as they like, wherever they like.

Pepsi, Coke's main rival, was created in 1898. But it didn't really become a significant threat to Coca-Cola until the 1970's, with the legendary "Pepsi Challenge". This ad campaign challenged Coke into an identity crisis, featuring people doing a blind taste test of the two colas and usually preferring Pepsi.  That ultimately spurred Coke to change the soda's taste, replacing it with New Coke in 1985. It turned out to be a bad decision. Some may not have minded New Coke's flavor profile, which food critic Mimi Sheraton described as "a little like classic Coca-Cola that has been diluted by melting ice" (via TIME). But customers wanted the old Coke back, and they were frustrated, to put it mildly. Among other things, Coke fans hoarded bottles and cans of original Coke. A group in Seattle even gathered to pour New Coke down sewers. 

Dubbed the "marketing blunder of the century," the New Coke fiasco is so notorious that Coca-Cola even includes a feature about it on their official website. Four months after New Coke's debut, the company re-released its original formula, now called "Coca-Cola Classic". It seems like The Coca Cola Company made a real mistake, but there's debate about whether New Coke failed spectacularly or was a genius marketing move. The stunt earned Coke a ton of publicity and made people value the drink again. Once the original formula Coke was re-released, the company's sales improved. Meanwhile, New Coke still stayed around for nearly 20 years and was re-branded as Coke II in 1992. It was finally retired in 2002, only to be brought back for a short time in 2019 as a promotional tie-in with the show Stranger Things. 

Its colorful packaging and fruity flavors make Fanta seem like a rather cheerful soda, but it actually has a dark past: Fanta was created in World War II Nazi Germany. The Coca-Cola Company was already well-established and successful in Germany before World War II, but war-related trade embargos left Coca-Cola Deutschland without Coca-Cola syrup. Coca-Cola Deutschland's then-CEO, Max Keith, was resourceful. The company used food industry byproducts like apple remains from cider presses to create a new soda, which they ultimately dubbed Fanta. 

There's some debate about Max Keith's beliefs. He may have been a supporter of Nazi ideology, or he may have simply been trying to keep his head down and keep his many factory workers safe and employed during a dangerous time. But while Fanta was never directly tied to the Nazi party, it still has that shadow lingering around it. So when the company released a colorful, cheerful commercial in 2015 to celebrate Fanta's 75th anniversary, consumers who were aware of the drink's history were shocked, especially by one of the campaign's promotional slogans, which celebrated the "feeling of the Good Old Times."  The Coca-Cola Company, which still owns Fanta, apologized and pulled the ad. In an attempt to quell the controversy, a spokesperson reiterated to the Daily Express that Fanta had no connection to the Nazi party. 

In the 2010s, SodaStream entered the U.S. market, and they didn't do things by half measures. For instance, the company hired Hollywood star Scarlett Johansson as its brand ambassador. All was going well until activists pointed out that its primary factory was located on the West Bank, which implied that the company was oppressing Palestinians and unjustly occupying the land. Boycotts arose, some stores in the U.K. stopped selling SodaStream products, Johansson had to stop working with a nonprofit called Oxfam, and the company's stock prices plummeted. In 2015, SodaStream relocated its West Bank factory. 

But while this may seem like a victory, sources like NPR point out that it may have done more harm than good. SodaStream's presence on the West Bank actually helped Palestinians and the Palestinian economy. When the company moved away, 500 workers lost their jobs. Sometimes, sacrifices might justify the cause, but as Nick Robins-Early was astounded to report in a HuffPost article, by 2018, the controversy and activism around SodaStream seemed to be largely forgotten. That year, PepsiCo bought the company for $3.2 billion. According to Grips, SodaStream is currently the most successful producer of personal soda makers in the world, bringing in more than 7 million dollars in 2024.

Since the 1920's, companies have been adding BVO (short for brominated vegetable oil) to a number of foods and drinks. BVO is an emulsifier, keeping ingredients from separating.  But useful as it is, over time, experts have found reasons to doubt its safety. If it's consumed in large quantities, BVO can cause memory and nerve problems.  BVO has been banned from food and drinks in Europe and Japan. Still, for many years, the FDA considered it safe for occasional consumption. But the organization eventually reconsidered, banning it in July 2024.

Ten years before the ban, after receiving petitions from consumers, the Coca-Cola Company and PepsiCo both agreed to remove BVO from their drinks, including sports drinks like Gatorade as well as sodas. By 2014, both companies announced that their beverages no longer contained BVO.  But they neglected to mention one exception: Mountain Dew. 

Not only did PepsiCo continue to use BVO in the drink, but consumers became concerned about it for another reason. Bromine is often used in flame retardants, and word got around that the same bromine compound was used in Mountain Dew. An online search for "Mountain Dew flame retardant" will reveal a number of web pages and questions that address this claim. Many of these sources, including an in-depth article from USA Today, explain that while bromine is used in both flame retardant and BVO, they're not the same compound.  Fortunately, this is no longer a worry for Mountain Dew fans; the company finally removed BVO from the drink in 2020.

Here's a soda controversy that's far worse than any other on our list. Held over four months in 1992 in the Philippines, Pepsi's Number Fever contest seemed like a great idea. Numbers were printed inside every Pepsi bottle cap in the country, and each night a winning number was announced on the news. Winners could claim a prize worth an equivalent of a few dollars. But on May 25, the contest's final night, the stakes were a lot higher. Only two caps were supposed to have the winning number printed on them, and they were each worth 1 million Philippine pesos. This wasn't the equivalent of 1 million dollars, but closer to $40,000. Still, a CBC report explains that in the poverty-stricken country, even that sum could have changed someone's life. 

It's easy to imagine the joy of the people who had the winning numbers — 349 — on their bottle cap. However, it turns out that, due to a computer error, instead of two winners, there were hundreds of thousands. Pepsi couldn't pay the prize money to all of those people, so they offered $20 for each bottle cap instead.  This did not go over well. Over the course of the next two years, Pepsi factories, offices, and trucks were attacked. Five people died, including a teacher and a 5-year-old girl who were innocent bystanders killed by a grenade. Consumers boycotted, and Pepsi workers and executives feared for their lives. Ultimately, the company had to pay a penalty to the Philippine government. But the contest's "winners" never received any significant monetary compensation, despite filing lawsuits. According to Daily Mail, people who lived through Number Fever remain haunted by the memories of this contest.