Mars candy company is retiring its cast of M&M's spokescandies

M&M’s retires woke ‘spokescandies’ amid consumer backlash

Weeks after launching its latest campaign to attach social causes to its candy, M&M’s has pulled its cartoon candy characters indefinitely.

Yesterday, the company took to Twitter to admit that its characters had become “polarizing” and reassure its fans that M&M’s mission has always been about “bringing people together.”

Actress and Saturday Night Live alum Maya Rudolph will replace the candy characters as company spokesperson effective immediately.

Below: M&M’s announced the retirement of its spokescandies via Twitter.

The latest pushback against the candy company began earlier this month when M&M’s announced its new “Flip the Status Quo” campaign, which featured bags of M&M’s with three ‘female’ characters flipped upside down on the package in an attempt to celebrate women who are “flipping the status quo everywhere.”

From the company’s press release:

“The M&M’S brand is on a mission to use the power of fun to create purposeful connections, as we work to create a world where everyone feels they belong,” said Gabrielle Wesley, Chief Marketing Officer, Mars Wrigley North America. “Women all over the world are flipping how they define success and happiness while challenging the status quo, so we’re thrilled to be able to recognize and celebrate them – and who better to help us on that mission than our own powerhouse spokescandies Green, Brown and Purple?”

Mars, M&M’s parent company, pledged to donate $1 from every limited-edition bag sold (up to $500,000) to two nonprofit organizations chosen for their commitment “to uplifting and empowering women doing incredible work in their respective fields and daily lives.” But the campaign drew criticism from conservative news outlets and consumers on social media who lambasted the candy company for being “woke.”

The showdown has been building for a while. In January of last year, M&M’s announced that its spokescandies would be getting makeovers, including new clothes and personalities to make them “more inclusive”and “representative of today’s society.”

(Wouldn’t you know it? There’s that myth of the modern audience again.)

In practice, these changes amounted to making the ‘female’ green and brown M&M’s appear less feminine, with subtler makeup and less sexy shoes and poses. In addition, the red M&M became nicer to the rest of the gang, and the orange candy was allowed to “embrace his true self, worries and all,” after acknowledging his “anxiety.”

(My God, I can’t believe I just typed that.)

The question now is whether yesterday’s announcement is a genuine response to consumer feedback or merely a setup for an upcoming Super Bowl stunt.

I don’t know, and frankly, I don’t care. It’s candy, you insufferable bellends. Maybe that should be enough?

See all Cranky ad reviews | Go to blog home page


What do you think? Is this M&M’s debacle yet another example of a company “getting woke and going broke”? Or is high-fructose corn syrup really the way to spark social change? Share your comments below.

5 comments

  1. A great example of the nonsense going on. And I can follow most of the story about what Mars did and the controversies and social media, etc. However…

    Maybe I’m missing something, but this confused me in their announcement:

    “Therefore, we have decided to take an indefinite pause from the spokescandies. In their place, we are proud to introduce a spokesperson America can agree on…”

    While I think the Crankster is right in suggesting this is a set-up for some clever Super Bowl ad…on the chance that it isn’t…

    Can’t they just change how they draw them? Or change the copy of the ad? They feel they actually have to lay-off the spokescandies? Or force them into early retirement?

    And it begs the questions…

    If they are laying off the spoke candies…Are they going to be collecting Unemployment? And does the Peanut M&M get more Unemployment benefits for his higher grade of skills – chocolate, candy coating…and peanuts?

    1. Good questions, Myles. Something tells me half of the now-unemployed M&Ms are melting down in the HR department while the other half are busily filing discrimination suits based on color and gender.

      And Myles — Purple is female. I can’t even tell you how many candies you just triggered by misgendering her right now.

      In any case, I think M&Ms dug themselves a hole they couldn’t get out of when they turned their little spokescandies into flag-waving advocates for various causes. They’d have done much better to maintain the characters’ playfulness and innocence — the company could still have backed all of its pet causes quietly in the background, and the people who buy candy based on social causes would have been happy. (Well, not all of them. Some folks just won’t be satisfied until the world looks they way they want it to.)

      That last bit surely reflects anyone and everyone whose demands may have influenced the company’s decision to “update” the characters in the first place . . . but I’m sure the enlightened progressives at M&Ms also thought it was a brilliant idea.

      Good to hear from you.

  2. Thank goodness for the backlash! I feared the next batch of M&Ms would be the LBGTQ+ rainbow colors. Why can’t candy be what it is: candy.

    1. Right, Mike? Just sell your damn candy. Alas, virtue signaling and profiteering on social-justice issues is the hawt new craze for brands and advertisers today — especially among those who lament that they aren’t doing more with their lives than hawking bits of colored sugar.

      Thanks for writing.

    2. My only response to your question comes from a one shot nurse in one of my favorite episodes of M*A*S*H, “The Incubator”:

      Because it would save time and energy and it would make sense.

Comments are closed.