Dr Pepper Responds to Consumers Regarding its Patriot Can [missing "Under God?"]

Dr Pepper/Seven Up, Inc - corporate website ^ | Dr Pepper/Seven Up, Inc

[newzjunkey]

I accept their explanation as truthful and honest. They wanted to emphasize unity without the bland "United We Stand" phrase. They did so by invoking language from the Pledge.

This isn't like the patriotic "commercial" that ran in movie theatres (particularly the Edwards chain in So. Cal) where it was accompanied entirely by "America The Beautiful" tellingly missing the line "God shed his grace on thee and crown thy good..."

People who react negatively to this need, finding malice where this is no case, to get a grip and concern themselves with *real* problems.

On example might be the memorial cross atop Mt. Soledad here in San Diego. It's an unmistakeable landmark. The ACLA and an atheist have convinced the full circuit court to review a three judge appeals panel's finding, agreeing with the trial judge, San Diego acted properly in the auction of the land surrounding the memorial. This was the second time the city had attempted to please the ACLU and atheist complaintants by selling the land. The first sale was overturned. The second, done at the direction of a vote by the people of San Diego, a bidding auction, was a court approved settlement. The ACLU and atheist argue the bidding was rigged in favour of the veteran's group which has long cared for the site. This case has been ongoing for about eleven years now. It just won't die.

What disturbs me about this case, isn't that the City shouldn't be displaying a cross on public land, but that the Church/State separatists care NOTHING for the memorial's history. With the way they're preceding you'd think the city had erected it, wouldn't you? Not so.

The memorial was erected by a private family which then owned the land to honour the deaths of their veteran sons, (IIRC, in WWII). They left the memorial in their will to the city for upkeep. This happened before the culture of Church/State separation legal "jihad".

[rwfromkansas]

I think it is a bit too nit-picky to stop drinking it because they were lazy in designing a patriotic can, but the phrase in question...emphasizing our unity (every single word is meant to do so) is on nation, under God, indivisible." All three. It does not matter what the original Pledge said....we are using the one from today. BTW, I know that Bellamy was a socialist guy. I also know some interesting things about how they did the pledge....kind of like the heil hitler thing. But, none of this matters when we are looking at the pledge of today. I personally do not agree with the 'indivisible" part of the Pledge, as we are divided all the time. But, it is part of the Pledge and should be included in showing our unity, just as "under God" should.

[RonDog]

To me, it's a tempest in a soda can. They didn't cite the entire pledge, but rather just three words. And as Snopes noted in it's page on this subject...

LOL! "Tempest in a soda can!" - VERY good!!!

Thanks also for the information about snopes.com: "Urban Legens Reference Pages"

Here is a PARTIAL quote from their http://www.snopes2.com/inboxer/outrage/drpepper.htm:

Claim:   A new can design introduced by Dr Pepper includes the text of the Pledge of Allegiance with the words "under God" omitted.

Status:   Not quite.

...
-- snip --
...

Time magazine's 24 September 2001 cover displayed the same words (without the ellipses) but drew no significant complaints:

Last updated:   9 February 2002

The URL for this page is http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/drpepper.htm

Urban Legends Reference Pages © 1995-2002
by Barbara and David P. Mikkelson
This material may not be reproduced without permission

---

Sources:

    Grunwald, Michael.   "Pledge Purist Seeks to Give Pause a Rest."

    The Boston Globe.   9 March 1998   (p. A3).

    Heard, Ken.   "Dr Pepper Under Fire; Girl Says It Left Out God."

    Arkansas Democrat-Gazette.   9 February 2002.

    Associated Press.   "Students Upset Dr Pepper Edits God Out of Pledge."

    1 February 2002.

    The Columbus Dispatch.   "Under God' Reference Added to Pledge in '54."

    1 June 2000   (p. A8).

    Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.   "The Pledge."

    17 October 2001   (p. A14).

[MeekOneGOP]

Arthur Godfrey? I don't remember that. Amazing. Must have been a big flop then??

[Amore]

Absolutely No. 3. How ridiculous. I'm glad it turned out to be nothing because I love (diet) Dr. Pepper. Yum! And I suspect the people here who trash it's taste are really communists! ;- )

[nicmarlo]

Here's what I wrote them:

You say "that the message on these cans is a resoundingly patriotic, bipartisan message that we are a united nation." I say you have left out the most imporant part of our pledge and nation: God.

I shall no longer purchase Dr. Pepper or 7 Up products for my home or children. That's my message.

They're so stupid, thinking we're so stupid.

[rwfromkansas]

Again, God is part of the phrase expressing unity. We are one nation under what? We are one nation under GOD. Under God is part of the unity aspect and should be included in the phrase. It could have easily been put on the can. They have no excuse.

But, I am not going to spend any more time on this trivial issue of a pop can. I am not upset enough to even contact the company.

[RonDog]

...This isn't like the patriotic "commercial" that ran in movie theatres (particularly the Edwards chain in So. Cal) where it was accompanied entirely by "America The Beautiful" tellingly missing the line "God shed his grace on thee and crown thy good..."

THAT was a GREAT thread, too! (IMHO)

See also:
O, Beautiful for GOD-less skies: New release of "America the Beautiful" drops "God shed His Grace"
Posted on 12/18/01 12:26 PM Pacific by RonDog

[Sloth]

Actually, when I saw an earlier thread on this, I was inclined to defend Dr. Pepper on the same grounds that others here have... that it was just a few words, not as though the left it out of the entire Pledge, etc. I said the same about Tom Hanks when he got criticized for it.

But after reading Dr. Pepper response, ostensibly written to maintain good PR, I am a lot more bothered by this. They could not even bring themselves to use the words "under God" in the entire press release!? This is like issuing a press release about a particular public figure without ever giving his name. Bizarre, and indicative of something deeper.

Anyhow, as far as the 'not enough room' excuse goes, haven't these people ever heard of using different font sizes?

[newzjunkey]

Wow, you learn something new all the time here on FR. :)

I looked this up and the original text, from 11 Oct 1892 (it was written for a Columbus Day celebration, published in a Boston youth magazine), was different in other ways as well. It had "...my flag..." instead of "...the Flag of the United States..." (that came Flag Day 1923), a year later "of America" was tacked on. It wasn't even an OFFICIAL pledge until June 1942, the following year the SCOTUS ruled public school students could not be compelled to say it as part of their daily routine.

The "under God" phrase did not come until Eisenhower added it Flag Day, 1954.

Fascinating.

[footstomper]

I have to ask. When someone is speaking of God as God, not while profaning His name why is it never spelled out? Why is G-d used, and what does it mean?

[PatrioticAmerican]

"bipartisan message "

God is a partisan?

[Anotherpundit]

I'm intended to agree. This is just people getting oversensitive. Stop acting like a bunch of liberals. If you want to really get worked up, protest something that's really ridiculous, like Spielberg cutting all the guns out of the E.T. rerelease.

[RonDog]

"God will be seriously upset at not being used as an advertising shill in Dr.Pepper's new campaign. As for their hyperbolic claim that we are, one nation indivisible, this is obviously misleading advertising, as we can easily be divided by petty crap like this." - Mission2mars

Absolutely the best analysis and answer so far!

(I do not hand out praise lightly.)

Hank

Re: God as "an advertising shill," see also, from http://www.netscrap.com/netscrap_detail.cfm?scrap_id=365:

Pope and the Colonel

----- Begin NetScrap(TM) -----

Pope and the Colonel

After watching sales falling off for three straight months at
Kentucky Fried Chicken, the Colonel calls up the Pope
and asks for a favor.

The Pope says, "What can I do?"
The Colonel says, "I need you to change the daily
prayer from, 'Give us this day our daily bread' to
'Give us this day our daily chicken'. If you do it,
I'll donate 10 Million Dollars to the Vatican."

The Pope replies, "I am sorry. That is the Lord's
prayer and I can not change the words."

So the Colonel hangs up. After another month of dismal
sales, the Colonel panics, and calls again.

"Listen your Excellency. I really need your help.
I'll give you $50 million dollars if you change
the words of the daily prayer from 'Give us this
day our daily bread' to 'Give us this day our daily chicken.'"

And the Pope responds, "It is very tempting, Colonel Sanders.
The church could do a lot of good with that much money.
It would help us support many charities. But, again, I must
decline. It is the Lord's prayer, and I can't change the words."

So the Colonel gives up again. After two more
months of terrible sales. the Colonel gets desperate.

"This is my final offer, your Excellency. If you
change the words of the daily prayer from,
'Give us this day our daily bread' to 'Give us this day
our daily chicken', I will donate $100 million to the Vatican."

The Pope replies, "Let me get back to you."

So the next day, the Pope calls together all of
his bishops and he says, "I have some good news
and I have some bad news. The good news is that
KFC is going to donate $100 million to the Vatican."

The bishops rejoice at the news. Then one asks about
the bad news.

The Pope replies, "The bad news is that we lost
the Wonder Bread account."


----- End NetScrap(TM) -----

Entered on: 05/12/1998

At least KFC didn't ask him to take out the "God" part... ;)

[Joshua]

Dr. Pepper, so misunderstood........

[governsleastgovernsbest]

I was aiming for a light-hearted suggestion that they were digging themselves a deeper hole by using a term, "verbiage", that could be construed as describing the Pledge as wordy.

Other than that, I wouldn't blow the whole matter out of proportion, but agree with those who suggest that they would have been better off handling the presentation differently. "One Nation Indivisible" might have been better than the use of the ellipsis.

[RonDog]

I'm intended to agree. This is just people getting oversensitive. Stop acting like a bunch of liberals.
If you want to really get worked up, protest something that's really ridiculous, like Spielberg cutting all the guns out of the E.T. rerelease.

Wow. That's news to ME! (But, naturally, NOT to Free Republic...)

See:

Spielberg may remove ALL THE GUNS out of "E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial" (my title)
Posted on 08/13/2001 12:05:35 PDT by Darth Sidious

Anybody know the LATEST info on this story?

[mustapha mond]

They will get no more of my money. --MM

[RonDog]

Other than that, I wouldn't blow the whole matter out of proportion, but agree with those who suggest that they would have been better off handling the presentation differently. "One Nation Indivisible" might have been better than the use of the ellipsis.

I see. Good analysis.

When they truncate it from:

"One Nation, Under God, Indivisible"
to
"One Nation...Indivisible"

using an ellipsis, it implies that God is "unnecessary," (sort of lost "in the dots") since the PRIMARY definition for "ellipsis" is "omission of a word or phrase necessary for a complete syntactical construction but not necessary for understanding."

OTOH, I think that we may be reading TOO MUCH into this. Still, it reminds me of the old story about living your life in "The Dash," from

http://www.lindaslyrics.com/The%20Dash%20Poem.html