Now, the Corntroversy has another twist—with a ruling that almost sounds like a silly Super Bowl beer ad itself: A three-judge panel from the 7th U.S. Court of Appeals overturned the case’s most recent ruling which prevented Bud Light from making corn syrup claims. The court’s reasoning: “If Molson Coors does not like the sneering tone of Anheuser-Busch’s ads, it can mock Bud Light in return,” the judges were quoted as saying.
In all seriousness, Molson Coors’ case does hinge on a difficult debate: Are Bud Light’s claims that it uses “no corn syrup” intentionally misleading to consumers, despite the fact that they are, in essence, true? An analogy would be that if one major cola brand advertised as “the cola without rat poison,” does that not imply that other major cola brands are made with rat poison despite being true? With a more dramatic example like that one, Molson Coors’ argument holds a bit more weight.
Still, in the end, the judges seemed to view “corn syrup” as something that shouldn’t be so “corntroversial” in the first place. The court reportedly stated that it “is for consumers rather than the judiciary to decide” whether corn syrup is good or not, and that “Litigation should not be a substitute for competition in the market.”
Meanwhile, the Corntroversy doesn’t yet appear over. In a statement to the AP, Molson Coors said they were “exploring our options.” One can only assume that, beyond Molson Coors’ lawyers, the brewer’s most sneering ad copywriters are also at the ready.