Oreo Shareholders Demand Report


Popular cookie brand Oreo has come under fire for its partnership with the LGBT organization PFLAG, with conservative group National Legal and Policy Center (NLPC) releasing an ad blasting the cookie company for supporting what they call a “militant” group.

The controversy centers around PFLAG’s promotion of sexually explicit books in school libraries, including titles such as “This Book Is Gay,” “Gender Queer,” “Flamer,” and “Lawn Boy.” These books have raised concerns among some parents for their mature and even pornographic content, and are among the top challenged books according to the American Library Association.

In a new ad, NLPC warns parents that Oreo’s support for PFLAG may mean that the beloved cookie brand is “grooming children” and “corrupting” them with harmful and controversial ideas. The ad also questions what happened to the “kid-friendly” Oreo of old and urges parents to be vigilant in protecting their children from the influence of these books.

Moreover, the NLPC is taking their criticism a step further, filing a shareholder proposal calling for a committee to examine the risks of Oreo’s associations with groups like PFLAG. According to Chesser, the director of the NLPC’s Corporate Integrity Project, this proposal is meant to bring transparency to Oreo’s partnerships and potentially reconsider their alliances with “divisive political activists.”

The conservative group is not alone in their concerns about the negative impact that taking a stance on controversial cultural issues can have on a company. Other well-known brands, such as Bud Light, Target, and Disney, have experienced boycotts and backlash from customers after wading into sensitive topics and alienating certain demographics.

This is a cautionary tale for companies like Oreo, who may be tempted to jump on the bandwagon of trendy social causes without fully considering the consequences. As consumers become more politically divided, aligning with controversial groups can result in damage to a company’s bottom line.

Oreo’s partnership with PFLAG is just one example of the progressive agenda infiltrating businesses, schools, and even children’s literature. As conservatives, it’s our duty to stand up against these harmful influences and protect our children from being exposed to explicit and confusing content.

Some may argue that Oreo’s partnership with PFLAG is a positive step towards promoting diversity and inclusivity, but at what cost? Is it worth alienating a large portion of their consumer base and risking their reputation for a fleeting moment of political correctness?

In the end, parents must decide for themselves whether they want their children to be exposed to these controversial ideas promoted by PFLAG through Oreo’s support. But for many, I think they’ll stick to traditional cookie brands that don’t come with a side of explicit books and political agendas.