"Cocaine"? Maybe Not So Dumb

When I first saw the story this morning in the Bulldog Reporter, I thought they were kidding: a beverage company, under pressure from the FDA, is withdrawing its new energy drink, which was named simply..."Cocaine." The company would rename it, but might fight to keep the name. The company insists there is no trace of cocaine, or any illegal drug, in its drink.

So, of course, my immediate reaction (and perhaps yours too) was: are they nuts?

On reflection, though, my answer is, maybe not so much.

I mean, look what they've accomplished by putting out a drink called "Cocaine Energy Drink" and getting into a battle over it. Do you think it's hurt them with their target 20-30 year old audience? Probably not. Maybe it might remind older people that when Coca-Cola started, back in 1885, it actually did contain some cocaine (as did many patent medicines of the period; when cocaine itself became suspect, Coca-Cola quickly began phasing it out of the drink - it's long gone).

If you buy into the idea that a major goal of PR is to get people talking about your product - I think, in this context, I'd avoid the word buzz - then maybe it wasn't a dumb stunt at all. Not one I might have gone for...but I suspect it has achieved its goal.