'People's Cafe' triggers outrage in China forcing a name change - 'Marketing crossed bottom line'

A cafe in China received a public scolding for using the "People's" in its name. Notably, the Chinese government uses the word "People" in several ways, and it is also used alongside its authoritative institutions. The country’s official name is the People’s Republic of China, and the Chinese yuan is also called renminbi, with “renmin” meaning people in Mandarin. Its military is also known as the People’s Liberation Army. So when a cafe called itself People’s Cafe, it irked the government. In an opinion piece, the state media lashed out against it for riding on the "gimmick economy." The People’s Daily, the Communist Party mouthpiece that also used the word, wrote that the term "carries a distinct public character and profound political connotations, embodying specific social sentiments and public interests."

The coffee chain has now apologised and changed its name after it was roasted for using the term to further its interests and attract customers. Its decor is red with a star on its storefront, and a typeface inspired by the calligraphy of China’s first communist leader, Mao Zedong. “Marketing can be creative, but it must not cross the bottom line,” the daily wrote. Pictures of the cafe were splashed around Chinese social media, showing drinks sprinkled with “China” on top. It also carries the slogan “Tell China’s story with coffee” on the walls, showing how it was using patriotism to sell its coffee.

Netizens ask, isn't using ‘People’ illegal?

Following the backlash, it was now changed its name and offered an apology. Its full name is Yao Chao People’s Cafe, but it uses only "People’s Cafe" at overseas outlets, including in Macau and Hong Kong, which it says will remain the same. However, it will add its legally registered moniker back at the 30 outlets it has across the country, according to state media. Netizens also aren't happy with the trick the cafe pulled. One user asked, “Isn’t that in breach of the law? Shouldn’t it be suspended and reorganised?”