[thisisweirdok]

So is birthday cake, the key is moderation and education — not banning everything that's remotely bad for you.

Unfortunately Coca-Cola spends more on their own form of education (advertising) than many countries spend on actual education.

[na85]

Equating advertising with education, even in jest, is dangerous.

[thisisweirdok]

I was intentionally equating them to emphasize the problem. If you're not educated to discern the difference between traditional education and advertisement, then there is no practical difference.

Coca-Cola (and advertisements for it) is more widely available than basic education. I personally think this is unethical on part of the advertiser, doubly so when you're selling something that's both unhealthy and somewhat addicting. There are populations in the world who can't read, but can recognize the Coca-Cola logo.

[pessimizer]

There's no difference between advertising and education other than the stated intentions of the author.

[na85]

Intent matters.

[SllX]

Independent of intent, all education is indoctrination.

Where I rent comes into play is what you intend for the indoctrinated to do with that education: buy coke, participate in the local ICBM program, or maintain society’s plumbing, the same plumbing the water and sugar in all that coke is pissed down. Either way it creates jobs.

[astine]

I'll bite. What exactly is the danger?