Killing the Golden Goose—for Politics
Unilever just fired David Stever, the CEO of Ben & Jerry’s, reportedly over his support for the brand’s pro-Palestine stance. Translation: they canned a guy for doing exactly what the brand is known—and loved—for.
Let’s be clear: Ben & Jerry’s wasn’t just another ice cream brand in Unilever’s portfolio. It was the brand with the most loyal following, best-performing social engagement, and an actual moral backbone. And Unilever decided to blow that up because some executives got scared of a political opinion.
Idiotic.
What Unilever Got Wrong
This wasn’t just a routine personnel shift. It was a breach of contract and a PR disaster. When Unilever bought Ben & Jerry’s back in 2000, they agreed to a unique acquisition deal. It included:
- An independent board of directors with control over the brand’s social mission.
- A commitment to keep Ben & Jerry’s political activism intact.
- A clause that said the CEO could not be fired without consultation and good faith collaboration with the board (CBS News).
Guess what? Unilever skipped the consultation. Now Ben & Jerry’s is suing them.
The Brand That Actually Walked the Talk
Ben & Jerry’s has always punched above its weight—not just in flavors, but in values:
- Publicly supported Black Lives Matter
- Called for a ceasefire in Gaza
- Slammed Trump’s white nationalism
- Took on corporate power and climate change
This is the brand that didn’t just do rainbow capitalism every June, but actually backed it up with money and lawsuits.
Unilever knew this when they bought it. And it worked: Ben & Jerry’s routinely outperformed other Unilever ice cream brands like Breyers, Magnum, Klondike, and Good Humor (Unilever Brand List).
Why? Because people aren’t just paying $8 for chunks and swirls—they’re paying for a conscience.
You Don’t Fire the Face of Your Integrity
David Stever wasn’t some rogue employee. He was aligned with the brand’s DNA. According to court documents, he was fired “for his commitment to Ben & Jerry’s social mission” (CBS News).
Unilever’s excuse? A vague “career conversation.” Weak. What’s more likely is that Stever became a liability to executives trying to depoliticize the brand and protect their corporate image.
Big mistake. Because now they’ve just proven every activist’s worst fear: that conscience will be punished.
The Foundation That Unilever Just Undermined
Let’s not forget the Ben & Jerry’s Foundation, a registered nonprofit that donates millions annually to grassroots causes. It’s funded by a chunk of ice cream profits and run with employee input (GuideStar Profile).
It’s not just marketing—it’s infrastructure for activism. And firing Stever jeopardizes that entire model.
Ice Cream With a Backbone—or Just Another Corporate Sludge?
Ben & Jerry’s stood out because it meant something. Even if you didn’t agree with every stance, you knew what the brand stood for. That clarity made it bulletproof to the culture wars.
By contrast, Unilever owns brands like:
- Dove (weird body positivity commercials while selling whitening creams overseas)
- Axe (still stuck in 2008 frat bro mode)
- Magnum (bougie branding, zero soul)
None of them have the loyalty—or integrity—of Ben & Jerry’s. So what does Unilever do? They try to make Ben & Jerry’s more like them.
What Should Happen Now
Unilever should reverse course, rehire Stever, and apologize. But they won’t. Which means we, the consumers, have to speak in the only language they understand: money.
Call to Action: Make Them Feel It
- Boycott Unilever brands: That includes Dove, Hellmann’s, Vaseline, Breyers, Magnum, Klondike, Axe, Degree, and more (Full list here).
- Buy Ben & Jerry’s (if it’s still independent enough to matter).
- Donate to the Ben & Jerry’s Foundation directly (GuideStar).
- Tell Unilever why you’re done: Email, call, post, tag. Make it loud.
Because if we let corporations silence the few brands that actually stand for something, then nothing will.
This isn’t just about ice cream. It’s about who gets to speak—and who gets silenced—when money is on the line.
Leave a comment