Ben & Jerry’s Co-Founder Ben Cohen Launches Pro-Palestinian “Watermelon Flavor” Campaign Online

By: Russ Spencer

Ben Cohen, the co-founder of Ben & Jerry’s ice cream and a longtime political activist known for his outspoken criticism of Israel, has launched an online campaign encouraging supporters of the Palestinian cause to create a fictional ice cream flavor themed around Palestinian solidarity.

The initiative, which Cohen calls a “creative protest,” urges participants to develop a “watermelon flavor” ice cream and design packaging featuring symbols commonly associated with anti-Israel movements. The watermelon motif has long been used by pro-Palestinian groups as a political symbol, reflecting the colors of the Palestinian flag.

According to a report on Friday at VIN News, Cohen framed the campaign as an act of defiance against what he described as “corporate censorship,” after claiming—without presenting evidence—that Magnum Ice Cream prevented Ben & Jerry’s from producing a flavor meant to “support peace in Palestine.” Cohen’s claim has not been corroborated by either Magnum or its parent company, Unilever.

As detailed in the VIN News report, Cohen announced the campaign on social media, calling it a global challenge for activists, artists, and consumers who “believe individuals and companies should not be silenced in talking about Palestine.”

The initiative invites participants to propose names, ingredients, and packaging designs for a hypothetical flavor celebrating “Palestinian creativity and resilience.” Cohen’s post included a prompt for fans to upload concept art featuring the red, green, black, and white palette emblematic of pro-Palestinian activism.

“This is a challenge for everyone who believes individuals and companies should not be silenced in talking about Palestine,” Cohen declared in his promotional statement.

Although framed as a collaborative effort, the project is not affiliated with Ben & Jerry’s, its current corporate ownership, or any legitimate ice cream manufacturer. Instead, the effort exists solely as an activist campaign, using social media engagement to generate attention for Cohen’s political messaging.

Cohen later announced that a fan-submitted flavor concept by participant Laura Davis had been selected as the “winner.” The selected entry, however, will not be produced or distributed commercially.

According to the information provided in the VIN News report, this latest campaign marks another instance of Cohen blending consumer branding with political advocacy. His approach—leveraging his identity as the co-founder of a globally recognized company to promote partisan causes—has sparked both praise and controversy throughout his career.

Cohen has long been critical of Israeli policies and has used his public platform to amplify pro-Palestinian positions. His activism often extends beyond traditional political organizing, frequently intersecting with consumer culture and corporate branding.

By associating political causes with ice cream imagery and corporate-style marketing, Cohen seeks to engage public attention while applying pressure on major companies he accuses of stifling dissent. In this instance, the campaign takes direct aim at MagnumGlobal, which he claims acted to suppress pro-Palestinian sentiment within the commercial ice cream industry.

Cohen wrote in a social media post shared by VIN News, “Show MagnumGlobal what creativity and solidarity can do.” The statement encouraged supporters to demonstrate that “corporate suppression” could be countered through grassroots participation.

This is not the first time Cohen has publicly inserted himself into debates over Israel and corporate responsibility. In previous years, he has called for boycotts and divestments targeting Israel, aligning himself with the rhetoric of the BDS movement (Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions).

In 2021, Ben & Jerry’s—under its then-independent board—announced plans to end sales in Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank), prompting a firestorm of criticism. The decision drew condemnation from Israeli officials and Jewish organizations worldwide, while Cohen and fellow co-founder Jerry Greenfield defended the move as an “ethical” stance.

However, Unilever, the multinational corporation that owns Ben & Jerry’s, later reversed that decision, restoring the company’s operations in Israel. Cohen has since accused corporate executives of “undermining the company’s social mission” and of bowing to political pressure.

VIN News reported that his new “watermelon flavor” campaign appears to be a direct continuation of his pattern of fusing brand nostalgia with political advocacy—using the Ben & Jerry’s legacy to advance a distinctly anti-Israel message.

Reaction to the campaign has been swift. Critics and Jewish advocacy groups have condemned the project as provocative and divisive, accusing Cohen of exploiting a consumer-oriented medium to promote hostility toward Israel.

According to the information contained in the VIN News report, several social media commentators noted the irony of promoting “peace” while simultaneously invoking symbols and rhetoric tied to anti-Israel activism. Detractors argue that the initiative does little to advance dialogue or reconciliation and instead deepens polarization by framing Israel and its supporters as agents of suppression.

Some commentators also pointed out that Cohen’s attempt to politicize an ice cream flavor exemplifies a broader trend in “brand activism”—the use of consumer branding and viral marketing to advance political agendas. While Cohen positions the campaign as a free-speech issue, critics contend that it weaponizes consumer culture to further anti-Israel narratives.

The VIN News report noted that even among progressives sympathetic to Palestinian rights, the campaign has drawn skepticism for its lack of tangible goals beyond social media engagement.

To date, Magnum Ice Cream and its parent company Unilever have not responded publicly to Cohen’s accusations that they blocked a pro-Palestinian product. As the report at VIN News pointed out, there is no evidence that such a flavor proposal was ever formally presented or rejected within corporate channels.

Industry insiders have also remained largely silent. Marketing analysts quoted by VIN News suggested that major food and beverage corporations are unlikely to engage with the controversy, preferring to avoid entanglement in highly politicized international disputes.

Unilever’s past experience with the Ben & Jerry’s Israel controversy likely reinforces this caution. After the backlash from governments, consumers, and investors over Ben & Jerry’s boycott announcement, the company has made efforts to distance itself from political campaigns of any kind, emphasizing its focus on commercial growth rather than ideological messaging.

Cohen’s “watermelon flavor” initiative remains a symbolic protest rather than a tangible product or business venture. While it has generated attention within pro-Palestinian circles and on activist social media platforms, there are no indications that any major company or distributor intends to adopt the concept.

Observers have described the campaign as another example of performative activism—a gesture designed to attract attention rather than achieve concrete change. In this sense, the “imagined flavor” functions primarily as a form of political theater, using corporate imagery to sustain an ideological message.

Cohen, however, continues to promote the project as a demonstration of “solidarity and creativity,” and VIN News reported that he has pledged to expand the campaign into a series of online art and design challenges centered around Palestinian symbolism.

Ben Cohen’s latest initiative reflects his ongoing commitment to using his celebrity status and brand legacy as tools of political expression. His online campaign to create a “pro-Palestinian watermelon flavor” encapsulates his approach: blending social activism, cultural marketing, and political messaging under the banner of free expression.

While the campaign has garnered media attention, its practical impact remains limited. It exists not as a real consumer product but as an extension of Cohen’s long-running efforts to cast global corporations—and by extension, Israel—as suppressors of dissent.

For many, the episode underscores how consumer culture continues to serve as a stage for ideological battles, with figures like Cohen transforming nostalgia for familiar brands into instruments of political confrontation.

The “watermelon flavor” controversy serves as yet another chapter in Ben Cohen’s long and contentious history of merging commerce with activism—an endeavor that, while attention-grabbing, remains confined to the realm of symbolism rather than substance.