Though health is a concern for many consumers, most of PepsiCo’s revenue growth is still coming from these high-fat and high-salt snacks. Also, the potential for revenue growth in the healthy snacks market is looking difficult because of slim margins and consumer’s high preference for snack taste. If I was a consumer health advocate, I would prefer PepsiCo to make a transition to healthier snacks by reengineering their current products and introducing new and healthier alternatives. This difference in preference stems from conflicting motives and outlooks. A shareholder’s financial stake in the company would lead them to prefer a revenue-driven strategy, while a consumer health advocate’s worldview would lead them to prefer a less profitable, public health-driven …show more content…
Personally, I weigh appropriateness of a commercial by looking at the nature of the political issue being discussed and its relation to the product, service, or mission of the company. Often political issues like gun violence and terrorist attacks are inappropriate for commercials, because they can be easily seen as an attempt to capitalize off the victims of tragedies. On the other hand, Budweiser’s commercial about immigration demonstrated how politically charged commercials can be tastefully done and have significance to the company. By revealing the significance of immigration in the founding of Budweiser, Budweiser was able to demonstrate the issue’s appropriateness and importance to the company in terms of their brand and history. Still, the appropriateness of politically charged commercials is largely subjective and has different criteria from person to