Michael Jackson to Appear on Pepsi Cans: Acceptable or Inappropriate?

by SodaHead Celebs Posted 2012/05/04 13:00:00

Related Topics: Michael Jackson, Pepsi, cans, Campaign, Ads, Television, International, History, Work, Songs, rumors, singer, soda, Nicki Minaj, News, Pop

Read More

382 votes
Read all 274 opinions
Lightning Report View Results and Demographics + View Demographics

Loading Demographics... Click an icon to see demographic results Display unknown and private
	Acceptable	222 votes	58%
	Inappropriate	160 votes	42%

Rumors of a Michael Jackson hologram might still hold weight, but they won't be the first reappearance of the late King of Pop. First, Pepsi is making him the King of Soda Pop. Pepsi announced it will be featuring the deceased performer in its latest ad campaign by printing his image on Pepsi cans, in a television ad, and by distributing remixes of his songs through promotional offers. It's going to be an international ad campaign, and according to News One, the nature of the campaign will vary by country.

Jackson actually has a history with Pepsi, and it's not a pretty one. He first worked with them in 1983, when he appeared in a commercial with "Fresh Prince of Bel Air" star Alfonso Ribeiro. Jackson continued to work with them until a faulty firework severely injured him. But now that the singer is no longer with us, there's obviously not danger of that happening. The new campaign will be closely tied to the ads Nicki Minaj has been working on, and will reportedly include upwards of one billion "limited edition" MJ cans.

+18

Add a comment above

BIG BAD JOHN R. 2012/05/04 16:52:10

Inappropriate

+10
It was because of a Pepsi Commercial that went wrong that altered Michael's Life.

Now they want to make More Money on him after his Death!

RIP MICHAEL http://michaeljacksonremember...
>> See Replies

More polls by SodaHead Celebs

relic to Denise ... 2012/05/05 22:46:09 (edited)

You looking in a mirror or something?
.You know creating a sockpuppet reveals you're a real coward, don't you?

reply
addie to relic 2012/05/05 22:45:25

+1
Mean, but funny.

reply
Cookie 2012/05/05 17:08:33

Inappropriate

+1
The decision should be left to his children and if they say it's o.k. then all money should go to his favorite charities in his name.

reply
BOOGIE-WOOGIE-MUSIC-MAN-ROC... 2012/05/05 17:02:58

Inappropriate

+2
I believe that his memory, can be celebrated and more appropriate way.

reply
Krazy_Bor!Cua551 2012/05/05 16:50:59

Inappropriate

+2
Since he's dead.... I dnt think it's acceptable

reply
NickTheAceBassist 2012/05/05 16:50:50

Acceptable

reply
Margaret Jacobson 2012/05/05 16:31:52

Acceptable

He worked for them before.............I am "reasonably sure" that his estate will benefit from the image.........his children, parents, brothers and sisters, nieces and nephews ....perhaps?? Charities ??

reply
mike j to Margare... 2012/05/05 17:41:43

this is one of those SH questions that needed the also "who cares" check off . my feelings are if Pepsi , RC , NuGrape, or Blatz beer wants to put a photo ,sign or symbol on their can and do it legal and right , then GO FOR IT, gee whiz why the controversy here ? And if the American public does not like it , the stuff will sit on the retailers shelf , or the bar will find nobody will take one of the cans , and the word will get back real quick that that was a big mistake or on the other hand the advertisement might be a flash hit and the product will rise like a kite in sales and the container will become a collectable .maybe we will see old Barry Weise on Storage Wars buy a whole storage locker full of them. But to worry the good serious minded folks here on SH with this question , is just a big waste of technology and time. everybody have a great weekend.

reply
POWERSHAKER 2012/05/05 16:29:12

Inappropriate

I don't know why they would put him on a Pepsi can. It doesn't make sense at all.

reply
Bett17 to POWERSH... 2012/05/05 20:06:33

+1
Because he advertised it back in the 80's-90's. Basically they're using this an excuse to milk money out of him. Sad.

reply
POWERSH... to Bett17 2012/05/05 21:25:33

Yep. Maybe you're right. :)

reply
Firefly 2012/05/05 16:27:13

Acceptable

+1
As a tribute to him,

I think it's perfectly acceptable...

reply
jules to Firefly 2012/05/05 22:45:09

So do I. Even though the commercial went wrong at first with the pyrotechics, he did advertise with Pepsi in the 80's. I think it's a nice way to remember him.

reply
Bruce 2012/05/05 15:00:18
Bunny 2012/05/05 14:40:58

Inappropriate

+1
not inappropriatte just dumb

reply
Dallas Newton 2012/05/05 14:16:11 (edited)

Inappropriate

+3
Michael Jackson's estate has been hijacked by imposters. His family will not be the beneficiaries. Until his family has a major say in his estate, all gimmicks should be boycotted. They only enrich the "executors" and SONY whom Michael hated and knew they betrayed him and stole many millions from him, while the controlled media falsely reported that his money problems were caused by his spending habits.

reply
Bubba d'Rosa 2012/05/05 14:01:28

Inappropriate

+1
As long as they are Wanted posters for child molesters. And put more wanted child molesters on the cans too.

reply
Sittind... to Bubba d... 2012/05/06 00:38:26 (edited)

Let's start with the criminal PATRIARCHY system, which is at the root of all child molestation.

reply
shadow76 2012/05/05 12:50:08

Inappropriate

Especially once they dumped him and turned their backs on him.

reply
lm1b2 2012/05/05 12:19:45

Inappropriate

+1
Considering the "Fact" that this person was a known Child Molester doesn't say much for Pepsi Management does it?In fact it even makes you wonder what kind of people are running Pepsi !

reply
Dallas ... to lm1b2 2012/05/05 15:00:51

The world is in the rotten shape it's in because we have gullible saps like you who the media leads around by the nose, believing everything that is "told" to them instead of looking beneath the surface and doing some research. But, if this is what you choose to believe, regardless to what the "facts" prove to be, then you have an agenda. Why are we cursed with so many sapsuckers like you and so few beautiful souls like Michael Jackson?

reply
lm1b2 to Dallas ... 2012/05/06 14:58:48

Tell that to the kids who he molested,and to the parents of these children who excepted millions of dollars to stop their children from testifying,those are "Facts Amigo".You wouldn't be one of those lovers of Children by any chance would you Amigo?

reply
Sittind... to lm1b2 2012/05/06 16:54:18

Name the children who he was found guilty of molesting. I am a lover of truth and justice. The "facts" are: The Prosecutor Sneddon begged children to come forward to say they were molested by Michael Jackson. He needed to build his case against Michael. He knew the shadiness of the parents and their children probably would not stand up in court. They were walking contradictions. Sure enough, Michael was acquitted of ALL charges. In the first case, research reveals that Michael was insistent on going to trial, but was eventually convinced by his "advisors and lawyers" to settle and be done with it. He said that was the worse mistake he ever made. The Judicial System reversed the system of criminal trial first and then civil case. If he was a child molester, the prosecutor had the obligation to bring this to a criminal trial, but it was always about extortion. The boy never spoke to either parent on becoming an adult and my understanding is that he has issued an apology.

reply
lm1b2 to Sittind... 2012/05/08 14:09:19

The facts are he paid out millions to cover up his Child molestation,who are you kidding,they are Juveniles,they didn't give out their names Duh! Do you think they could accuse him of child molestation without getting sued?You people are idiots if you think this low life was innocent!

reply
Sittind... to lm1b2 2012/05/08 16:03:30

Yes, they could accuse him of child molestation and not be afraid of being sued. Michael Jackson, as a Black man, was living under "Dred Scott".(A BLACK MAN HAS NO RIGHT'S A WHITE MAN IS BOUND TO RESPECT.) This is evident in how the Judiciary branch of government kept ignoring rules of law and making new laws, just to get him. As I mentioned before, it has always been a rule of law that a person accused of a serious crime as this is tried in a court of law to defend himself against these charges. In Michael Jackson's case the California Judiciary violated Michael's right to defend himself in a criminal court first, where the bar is higher. Instead, they said the Civil trial will be first, where it's all about the money, and the bar is much lower. In other words, the Judiciary system of California did not allow Michael to be tried by a jury as to his innocence against these charges. They went right for the money trial and after much protest and outrage from his attorneys, he was advised to settle the case, The controlled media never reported these "facts". But thanks to his loyal fan base, the truth is out there for anyone who is actually interested in the truth and not name calling. By the way, Michael was never convicted of anything. When he was able to get to trial in the se...

Yes, they could accuse him of child molestation and not be afraid of being sued. Michael Jackson, as a Black man, was living under "Dred Scott".(A BLACK MAN HAS NO RIGHT'S A WHITE MAN IS BOUND TO RESPECT.) This is evident in how the Judiciary branch of government kept ignoring rules of law and making new laws, just to get him. As I mentioned before, it has always been a rule of law that a person accused of a serious crime as this is tried in a court of law to defend himself against these charges. In Michael Jackson's case the California Judiciary violated Michael's right to defend himself in a criminal court first, where the bar is higher. Instead, they said the Civil trial will be first, where it's all about the money, and the bar is much lower. In other words, the Judiciary system of California did not allow Michael to be tried by a jury as to his innocence against these charges. They went right for the money trial and after much protest and outrage from his attorneys, he was advised to settle the case, The controlled media never reported these "facts". But thanks to his loyal fan base, the truth is out there for anyone who is actually interested in the truth and not name calling. By the way, Michael was never convicted of anything. When he was able to get to trial in the second case he was acquitted of all charges. Also, the names of the boys was well known They are Jordan Chandler and Gavin Arvizo, boys from shady, penniless families. If Michael was guilty of anything it would be his naiveness.
(more)

reply
Buoyant... to Sittind... 2012/05/08 17:36:06

So this is a black white thing? REALLY?!?!?! No, REALLY?????

reply
Dallas ... to Buoyant... 2012/05/13 16:30:42

It always is in the United States of America, where the Judiciary System is concerned. I don't care what civil rights laws are passed or any laws for that matter, if you don't have access to the legal system and courts for protection to uphold them, they don't mean anything. An example is New York State, where a multiracial commission conducted a study on racism in the NYS Judiciary; Their finding was that NYS is infested with virulent racism.

reply
lm1b2 to Sittind... 2012/05/09 21:20:53 (edited)

I haven't read so much BS since i came on SH,your either a black ,or one of those white liberals who believes everything they read,Jackson is a proven child molester,and everyone knows it,you are one sick puppy!

reply
Dallas ... to lm1b2 2012/05/13 16:40:33

Apparently, you don't read at all since MJ was never a proven child molester. Resorting to name calling won't change the facts of the cases. If you ever take up reading, I would suggest a book by Aphrodite Jones "The Conspiracy Against Michael Jackson". She is someone who has done the original research.

reply
lm1b2 to Dallas ... 2012/05/14 13:36:16

Even the liberal News Media admits this low life as a child molester,your riding a dead horse if you think this guy wasn't a child molester,i don't care what"Aphrodite" wrote Amigo,your nuts!

reply
Dallas ... to lm1b2 2012/05/15 12:54:32

When a person is not interested in the truth or facts of a situation, but is only interested in holding on to their position then they have another agenda, which mandates they must hold onto and promote their fallacies.

reply
lm1b2 to Dallas ... 2012/05/15 13:04:53

Keep telling yourself that guy isn't what everyone knows he is,evidently you cannot except the truth,i feel sorry for you,please do not respond!

reply
Dallas ... to lm1b2 2012/05/16 15:14:14

I do not accept what everyone "knows". I accept what truth the facts spell out.

reply
Bett17 to lm1b2 2012/05/05 20:11:04

+1
"known child molester" you'd have to be on the sex offender's list, have evidence, and be actually pleaded guilty.

There is no proof that he was an offender. And now that he's dead, why should this worry anybody? Accusations were years and years ago and some victims have admitted they were not touched.

reply
jules to Bett17 2012/05/05 22:47:29

+1
Yeh and you know, this subject is so over the hill now. Some ppl won't let it rest.
Old news!

reply
Bett17 to jules 2012/05/06 12:30:47 (edited)

Exactly! Some things just stick with society I guess. And since he's the most famous person in the world, the poor bloke wont get any real rest I suppose.

reply
jules to Bett17 2012/05/06 14:55:30

Yeh, he's unforgettable in a big way! =P

reply
lm1b2 to Bett17 2012/05/06 15:03:02

Would you want the public to know that you were molested by this freak?The "proof" Duh is the millions he paid their parents to stop them from testifying!You people who proclaim this freaks innocents are either a pervert like him,or just nuts!

reply
Sittind... to lm1b2 2012/05/06 17:06:15

Mr. Freakman, see the above quote to 1m1b2. Things are not always as they appear. MJ is innocent because that is what the research bears out. Not the controlled media source but actual facts of the case on file. There are books out there that uncover a horrible tale of the powers that be hell bent on literally destroying MJ; first through propaganda and then by physical death. Start with Aphrodite Jones and Leonard Rowe.

reply
Bett17 to lm1b2 2012/05/06 18:13:28 (edited)

A couple admitted that the parents told them to lie! And one of the "victim's" dad has had his phone call recorded, basically him saying he's going to "ruin" this man, he planned this for money. The boy also said they lied for cash!

Lets look at a small bit of info that I find interesting, Michael had rich and poor kid friends. The only ones that claimed he touched them were poor, one family had a history of lying about sexual harassment and theft before meeting Michael, all the rich kids said he didn't do anything. Finally..... what.. and I mean WHAT kind of parent would take the money and let him go free!? The money was OPTIONAL noone was forced to take it. They had a choice between wealth or justice, with a side order of keeping future kids safe!! Which would you choose??

There is no proof to point out he was a pedo, none, ziltch. There is MORE evidence to point out that these people were FRAUDS!! People like you follow the media so blindly, like cattle. So gullable.

reply