A coordinated social media campaign attempting to create division between MAGA supporters and MAHA (Make America Healthy Again) advocates was recently exposed and rejected by conservative
influencers. The controversy centered around a proposal to exclude sugary beverages from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).
The initiative, championed by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and supported by Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins, aimed to add sodas to the list of prohibited items under SNAP, joining alcohol and tobacco. The $113 billion program currently serves over 42 million Americans.
The campaign’s exposure began when several right-wing influencers simultaneously posted similar messages opposing the soda restriction, characterizing it as government overreach and drawing parallels to Michael Bloomberg’s failed soda ban in New York. Conservative podcaster Nick Sortor revealed that a PR firm called Influenceable had offered influencers up to $1,000 per post promoting pro-soda messaging, complete with prepared talking points and stock photos of President Trump drinking Diet Coke.
Senator Katie Britt of Alabama, who introduced the “Healthy SNAP Act” to exclude soft drinks and desserts from SNAP purchases, denounced the campaign as a failed attempt to manipulate public opinion. The legislation aims to promote better health outcomes and reduce chronic diseases among SNAP recipients.
Riley Gaines, a prominent conservative influencer with 1.5 million followers on X, disclosed that she had declined to participate in the campaign. When approached, organizers claimed the funding came from a private donor concerned about government overreach, though Gaines expressed skepticism about this explanation. RFK Jr. publicly commended Gaines for her integrity, criticizing companies that seek taxpayer funding for products he considers harmful to children.
Industry speculation initially pointed to the American Beverage Association (ABA) as the campaign’s sponsor, but spokesman William Dermody firmly denied any involvement. The ABA maintains its opposition to the SNAP restrictions through transparent channels, arguing that soda consumption isn’t driving obesity rates and citing data showing a 22.9% decrease in full-calorie soda sales while adult obesity has increased by 37.4% since 2000.
The controversy highlights the growing influence of social media marketing in both commercial and political spheres. A marketing executive, speaking anonymously, described such campaigns as part of a “Wild West” landscape where transparency determines legitimacy.
The debate carries significant implications for both public health policy and political alliances. With the domestic soda market valued at over $315 million in 2022, industry stakes are high. Political analysts, including Trump pollster John McLaughlin, note the importance of maintaining support from new coalition members, including health-conscious MAHA voters.
Political consultant Ryan James Girdusky observed that the MAHA movement has uniquely influenced Trump’s positions, citing his evolved stance on vaccines as an example. Despite the attempted disruption, the MAGA-MAHA alliance appears to remain united on the soda issue, with both camps supporting healthier alternatives for SNAP recipients.
One anonymous influencer confirmed receiving payment for participating in the campaign, while others declined the offer. The incident has sparked broader discussions about the ethics of paid influence campaigns and their role in shaping public policy debates.