Mars Inc., the food giant behind the former Uncle Ben’s rice brand, is reconsidering its decision to rebrand to Ben’s Original following widespread consumer backlash. In a statement that surprised fans and critics alike, the company acknowledged that nostalgia and a wave of public demand could lead to the return of one of America’s most iconic pantry staples.

“We’ve heard the fans,” said Mars spokesperson Linda Marsh. “Uncle Ben is more than just a name—it’s a legacy tied to family dinners, holiday recipes, and trust. And while our 2020 decision to rebrand was made with the best of intentions, it’s clear that many people feel like they lost more than a logo. They lost a connection.”

In 2020, amid a global reckoning on racial equity, Mars Inc. dropped the Uncle Ben’s name and imagery in response to criticism that it perpetuated outdated stereotypes. The smiling image of a Black man in a bow tie, widely interpreted as a servant figure, became a focal point for activists calling for greater sensitivity in corporate branding.

The rebrand to Ben’s Original was heralded as a progressive move by some, but for others, it was a gut punch to a familiar and trusted household name.

“Ben’s Original? It sounds like a knockoff brand,” said lifelong customer and self-proclaimed Uncle Ben loyalist Teresa Price. “I grew up with Uncle Ben. It felt like Mars just erased part of history. You can change the logo, but at least keep the name.”

While the rebrand initially garnered praise, the financial aftermath told a different story. Sales of Ben’s Original reportedly took a nosedive, with competitors quickly capitalizing on the brand’s struggles. Analysts estimate the company has lost millions annually due to the diminished recognition and loyalty associated with the new branding.

“It turns out people really, really liked Uncle Ben,” said marketing strategist Greg Halvorson. “You don’t just replace decades of trust and familiarity overnight, no matter how well-meaning your intentions are.”

The backlash against the rebrand has been loud and relentless, particularly on social media, where hashtags like #BringBackUncleBen and #RiceGate have trended intermittently for months. Fans of the original brand have posted photos of vintage Uncle Ben’s boxes, shared recipes that call specifically for “Uncle Ben’s rice,” and lamented the loss of a cultural touchstone.

“Uncle Ben wasn’t just rice,” one viral TikTok explained. “He was the MVP of every family potluck. Ben’s Original? He didn’t even get an invite.”

However, critics of the potential return argue that nostalgia shouldn’t trump progress. “Bringing back Uncle Ben would be a step backward,” said cultural equity advocate Alicia Carter. “The original branding was rooted in stereotypes, and we shouldn’t let warm, fuzzy memories override the need for positive change.”

Faced with declining sales and a divided public, Mars Inc. is now exploring ways to bring back the Uncle Ben name without reigniting past controversies. Among the ideas being floated:

A Minimalist Logo: Retain the Uncle Ben name while scrapping the image entirely.
Community Contributions: Dedicate a percentage of sales to initiatives benefiting Black communities, framing the brand as both nostalgic and forward-thinking.

Modernizing the Story: Reframe Uncle Ben as a self-made entrepreneur, moving away from the servant imagery and emphasizing his contributions to American culinary culture.

“We’re working on a solution that balances respect for history with our commitment to progress,” Marsh said. “It’s a delicate line, but we believe we can find common ground.”

The possibility of Uncle Ben’s return has sparked intense debate among consumers. “Finally, someone’s listening to the people,” wrote one fan on Twitter. “I’ve been hoarding my last box of Uncle Ben’s like it’s a collector’s item. Bring him back!”

Others, however, are more skeptical. “So Mars spent millions on a rebrand just to reverse course? Feels like they’re chasing profits, not principles,” tweeted another user.

The controversy has even drawn commentary from celebrities. Country music star Blake Shelton tweeted, “If Uncle Ben’s comes back, I’ll cook rice every day of the week. Let’s go!” Meanwhile, activist and actress Viola Davis urged Mars to tread carefully. “Representation matters. Let’s honor history without repeating its mistakes.”

Bringing back Uncle Ben won’t just be a branding decision—it will be a cultural minefield. Mars must navigate the complex intersection of consumer loyalty, corporate responsibility, and evolving societal norms. Critics warn that a misstep could alienate both sides of the debate.

“This isn’t just about rice,” said brand consultant Monica Hayes. “It’s about how companies respond to public sentiment while staying true to their values. Mars has a tightrope to walk, and the stakes couldn’t be higher.”

Mars Inc. has promised to announce its final decision early next year. In the meantime, the company plans to roll out a series of public surveys and focus groups to gauge consumer sentiment. “This isn’t a decision we take lightly,” Marsh said. “We want to get it right.”

Whether the Uncle Ben name makes a triumphant return or remains a nostalgic memory, one thing is clear: the debate over branding and cultural sensitivity is far from over. For now, fans and critics alike will be watching closely as Mars Inc. takes its next steps—one grain at a time.