A WSJ article is NOT very supportive of Coke’s newest can introduction: white Coke cans for the holiday season to support the polar bears, who have been one of Coke’s long-time holiday symbols. The criticism over this new white can is that consumers confuse regular Coke with diet Coke and get frustrated when they drink more calories than they bargained for.
I’ve taken a photo of both cans side by side so you can decide: is this really something to fuss about?
By way of full disclosure, I used to call on the Coca-Cola account and worked in this industry in the aftermath of the New Coke/Coke Classic fiasco, and my sister-in-law works for the World Wildlife Fund. I have not talked with her or with anyone at Coke, but I’ll just put in my two cents.
Coke would not have introduced this can unless they had done their homework by pre-testing consumers to find out how they felt about it. After the New Coke/Coke Classic fiasco, I learned that the world of Coca-Cola marketing, packaging, and labeling is full of lawyers and market researchers, to make sure they are always doing the right thing by their brand.
If you read more about the Arctic Home campaign, you will see that Coke is finding a way to work with their partner, WWF, to preserve the arctic habitat. This is an example of a win/win cause marketing effort where consumers should be able to understand why Coke is supporting the polar bears. 
When I worked in the industry, I sold plastic soda bottles to Coke and Pepsi and they changed their labels all of the time. It is a way to change your packaging to create excitement for your brand. This can artwork is no different. Sometimes you have to try new things to get the consumers’ attention. Sounds like this can did just that.
Karen
