After making a contentious choice about two different Pepsi products, the proprietor of a grocery store in Athens, Alabama named Phillip Stewart found himself in the middle of a heated argument after the decision he made. Because to the prominence of the NFL logo on the packaging of these particular products, Stewart, the proprietor of S&Z Grocery, made the decision to stop selling them altogether.

Stewart voiced his disagreement with the idea of supporting the National Football League (NFL), claiming that, in his opinion, doing so is unethical. He had the opinion that the athletes in the league were disrespectful to the flag when they “kneeled during the” playing “of the national anthem as a” means “of protest against police brutality and racial” injustice. Despite the fact that he understood the athletes’ reasons for protesting, he did not agree with the approach that they chose to use. He stated that there were other methods to solve the problems that were occurring.

Stewart informed his consumers of his intention to remove the Pepsi goods from his store shelves by posting on Facebook and sharing the news with them. He made it clear that despite his position, he was not against the protest in and of itself or Pepsi as a brand, as he was still selling other products from the company. His concern was strictly directed toward the things that bore the NFL emblem on them.
The decision that Stewart made was met with a variety of responses from the general people. There were many who disapproved of him and believed that his acts were either pointless or inappropriate. Others, on the other hand, praised him for being unafraid to speak up for what he believed in and admired him for having the courage to do it. An online discussion was started as a result of the statement, with users providing their feedback and sharing the article across various social media platforms.

In the end, Stewart’s decision to forbid the sale of Pepsi goods bearing the NFL emblem highlighted the difficulties involved in balancing one’s personal values with one’s professional obligations. It brought to light the significance of individuals standing up for what they believe in, despite the fact that doing so may subject them to criticism or controversy, despite the fact that public opinion was divided on the issue.