In a surprising turn of events, Mars Inc., the parent company behind Ben’s Original (formerly Uncle Ben’s Rice), has announced that it is considering bringing back the Uncle Ben branding following widespread backlash over its 2020 rebrand. After years of standing firm on their decision to pivot toward what they called “a more inclusive identity,” company executives now say they’re reevaluating their stance, citing what they describe as “overwhelming demand from our loyal customers.”
“Uncle Ben is more than just a name—it’s a legacy,” said Mars spokesperson Janet Fields at a press conference on Monday. “And while we made the change with the best of intentions, it’s clear from consumer feedback that many people felt we took away more than just a label. We’ve heard the fans, and we’re open to revisiting Uncle Ben’s place at the table.”
In 2020, Mars Inc. rebranded Uncle Ben’s Rice to Ben’s Original amid growing calls for companies to address racial stereotypes in their branding. The image of Uncle Ben, a smiling Black man dressed in a bow tie, was criticized for perpetuating outdated depictions of African Americans. The company’s decision to drop the name and imagery was praised by some as a step toward social progress but left others feeling that a beloved brand had been erased.
“Ben’s Original just doesn’t have the same ring to it,” said lifelong customer Patricia Rhodes. “I grew up with Uncle Ben. He was like a comforting presence in my pantry. Now it just feels… corporate.”
This sentiment has been echoed across social media platforms, where fans of the original branding have rallied under hashtags like #BringBackUncleBen and #UncleBenForever. The backlash reached a fever pitch earlier this year when a viral TikTok video compared Ben’s Original to “rice without a soul,” garnering millions of views and sparking debate.
Mars executives admit they were caught off guard by the intensity of the backlash. “We honestly thought we were doing the right thing,” Fields said. “But as it turns out, people aren’t as ready for change as we thought—or maybe they just really loved that bow tie.”
The company has reportedly commissioned multiple focus groups to gauge public opinion on the potential return of Uncle Ben’s branding. Early results suggest that the majority of participants associate the Uncle Ben name with positive feelings of nostalgia, trust, and, of course, delicious rice.
“It’s not just about rice,” said Fields. “It’s about what Uncle Ben represented to so many households: a reliable, wholesome presence in the kitchen.”
Not everyone is thrilled about the potential reversal. Advocacy groups that pushed for the original rebrand argue that bringing back Uncle Ben would be a step backward. “This isn’t about nostalgia—it’s about progress,” said a representative from the National Association for Cultural Equity. “Mars Inc. has a responsibility to lead by example, not pander to the loudest voices on social media.”
But others argue that the controversy has been overblown from the start. “At the end of the day, it’s rice,” said marketing analyst Greg Porter. “Let’s not pretend Uncle Ben is some cultural battlefield. People just want their old boxes back.”
Mars Inc. finds itself walking a tightrope as it tries to balance corporate responsibility with consumer demand. Insiders say the company is considering a compromise that would reintroduce the Uncle Ben name while avoiding the original imagery. One proposed design features a stylized “UB” logo alongside the tagline “Trusted for Generations.”
“We’re exploring options that honor the legacy of Uncle Ben without reverting to outdated representations,” Fields explained. “It’s a tricky line to walk, but we believe it’s possible.”
As news of the potential rebrand spread, social media erupted with both support and skepticism. Fans of the original branding celebrated the announcement with memes, throwback photos of Uncle Ben packaging, and heartfelt testimonials about the brand’s significance.
“I still have an old box of Uncle Ben’s I refuse to throw away,” one Twitter user wrote. “It’s my way of sticking it to cancel culture.”
Critics, however, were quick to point out the irony of Mars Inc.’s potential reversal. “So let me get this straight,” one user tweeted. “They spent millions on a rebrand just to go back to the old name? Corporate America, everyone.”
Some analysts believe the backlash isn’t the only reason Mars Inc. is reconsidering Uncle Ben’s return. Since the rebrand, sales of Ben’s Original have reportedly declined by double digits, with competitors like Minute Rice and Success Rice gaining market share.
“Let’s be honest—this is about money,” said retail consultant Sarah Lopez. “The Uncle Ben name was iconic. Rebranding to Ben’s Original stripped the product of its identity. People don’t just buy rice—they buy trust, tradition, and a story. Uncle Ben had all of that.”
Mars Inc. has promised to make a final decision on the branding by early next year, but the debate is far from over. Whether the company opts to fully reinstate Uncle Ben or settle on a compromise, one thing is clear: the Uncle Ben controversy has cemented itself as a case study in the intersection of branding, culture, and consumer loyalty.
“This isn’t just about rice,” Fields reiterated. “It’s about listening to our customers and finding a way to move forward together—one grain at a time.”
As Mars Inc. grapples with its next steps, fans of Uncle Ben can only hope that their favorite bow-tied figure finds his way back to store shelves. And if nothing else, they’ll always have the memories—along with a lifetime supply of rice-related puns on social media.
