Unpacking Blackpink's 'Ice Cream' Controversy

Here’s the thing about Blackpink’s “Ice Cream”: on release day, August 28, 2020, millions of fans tuned in for three minutes of bubblegum pop perfection, electrified by the collaboration with Selena Gomez. The music video, directed by Seo Hyun-seung, overflowed with pastel visuals, catchy hooks, and iconic choreography. BLACKPINK’s charisma, the addictive trap and electropop blend, and a songwriting team that included Teddy Park, Ariana Grande, Victoria Monét, and Bekuh Boom gave it instant chart power. Social media feeds flooded with “Ice Cream” memes, fan edits, and dance covers within hours. For many, it was the sound of summer in a year that desperately needed a mood lift.

But almost immediately, cracks appeared beneath the surface. The release wasn’t just a festival of streaming records and TikTok challenges. It became a flashpoint for misinformation, cultural misunderstanding, and online backlash. The most dedicated K-pop fandoms are known for their passion—and sometimes, for how quickly rumors and outrage can spiral.

Just twelve days after its release, KBS, one of South Korea’s largest broadcasters, announced they would not air “Ice Cream.” Their decision, made public on September 9, 2020, cited references to specific product brands in the song’s lyrics, which violated the network’s broadcasting standards. Under KBS guidelines, product placement or brand mention in lyrics is considered indirect advertising and can disqualify a song from TV play. That meant “Ice Cream,” a song positioned for maximum exposure, was suddenly off-limits to a key segment of the domestic audience.

But even before the KBS ruling, fans were already debating another controversy—one that quickly snowballed across international forums and Twitter threads. In late August 2020, some Muslim fans raised concern over a line in Lisa’s verse: “Play the part like Moses, keep it fresh like roses.” The phrase “like Moses” was interpreted by some as potentially disrespectful to the prophet Moses, a figure revered in Islam, Christianity, and Judaism. Screenshots and partial translations spread rapidly, and hashtags linking “Ice Cream” to alleged religious insensitivity trended in a handful of regions.

A key detail: songwriter Bekuh Boom stepped in to clarify the lyric’s intent. She explained, “Moses parted the Red Sea, for anyone who doesn’t know the story. So basically, take me, I’m going to need you to get through it if you’re my man. That’s the standard. If you can’t part the sea, then you can’t party with me.” Her statement, published by Suara.com, emphasized that the lyric referenced a biblical event as a metaphor for overcoming obstacles, not for disrespect. Still, the clarification arrived after days of heated online debate, and some people continued to share posts misrepresenting the lyric’s meaning.

The misinformation didn’t stop at lyric interpretations. In December 2020, the YouTube channel PopToonsTV uploaded a parody animation of “Ice Cream.” The video included a scene of BLACKPINK’s Rosé eating a dog, a reference that many viewers—especially those in Asian and K-pop communities—found racist and xenophobic. The backlash was swift: fans called out the video for perpetuating harmful stereotypes, particularly the trope associating East Asians with dog meat consumption. According to Allkpop.com, PopToonsTV began deleting critical comments from their social media channels, which only intensified the accusations and led to further outrage.

This wasn’t the first time a parody or meme had crossed a line, but the combination of a global audience and K-pop’s passionate online community meant the impact was amplified. Fans—especially those from Asian countries and those monitoring cultural representation in entertainment—argued that the video reinforced negative biases and failed to understand the consequences of trafficking in ethnic stereotypes.

The spread of misinformation and rumor didn’t end in 2020. On October 24, 2025, McDonald’s Indonesia announced the return of their Pink Top Black Cone ice cream. Almost immediately, rumors flooded online spaces suggesting that this was an official collaboration with BLACKPINK, due to the shared color scheme and the group’s ongoing “Ice Cream” association. The speculation was false—no partnership existed—but the brand was accused by fans of exploiting BLACKPINK’s signature pink-and-black aesthetic to boost sales. Some fans criticized McDonald’s Indonesia for “riding the K-pop wave” without proper credit or collaboration, and debate over ethical marketing tactics reignited in Indonesian and international K-pop communities.

The common thread in all these incidents is the speed and intensity with which debate and misinformation can spread through large, digitally connected fandoms. The initial misunderstanding over Lisa’s Moses lyric was amplified by quick-take commentary, incomplete translations, and the viral nature of outrage on platforms like Twitter and Instagram. Even after a key songwriter clarified the intention behind the lyric, not all fans saw or accepted the explanation. That left room for the controversy to persist in some corners of the internet.

Similarly, the PopToonsTV parody controversy was inflamed not only by the content itself but by the creators’ response. When fans noticed their comments being deleted rather than addressed, the sense of grievance and exclusion deepened. In the words of one observer, “In the video, they show Rosé eating a dog. People are calling them out on Instagram but they keep on deleting the comments calling them out for their xenophobic video.” This reaction suggests that the community’s frustration often comes not just from perceived offense but from a lack of acknowledgment or meaningful dialogue.

The McDonald’s Indonesia incident in 2025 highlights another facet: even years after the song’s release, new rumors can emerge whenever a brand, event, or product seems to echo BLACKPINK’s imagery or iconography. The Pink Top Black Cone’s design was enough to trigger speculation and criticism, despite no official link to the group. This shows how powerful the group’s visual branding became—and how quickly misinformation can attach itself to anything remotely related.

Who gets affected by this cycle? First, the artists themselves—BLACKPINK and Selena Gomez—carry the burden of global scrutiny and misinterpretation, sometimes for words or images not intended to offend. Songwriters like Bekuh Boom find themselves needing to publicly clarify creative choices, which can shape how future lyrics are written or vetted. K-pop fans, especially those in minority or religious communities, can feel alienated if their concerns are dismissed or if dialogue is shut down by content creators, brands, or other fans. And finally, platforms like YouTube and Instagram become battlegrounds for moderating debate, criticism, and accountability.

The fairness of the criticism in each case is hotly debated. Some argue that lyrics and imagery in global pop need to be considered through a multicultural lens, and that artists and brands should anticipate potential misreadings. Others point out that not all outrage is rooted in accurate interpretation, and that misinformation—especially when it spreads faster than official clarification—can do lasting reputational harm. The deletion of criticism on social media, as with the PopToonsTV case, raises questions about freedom of speech versus moderation and when creators should address versus ignore backlash.

Within the BLACKPINK fandom and the wider K-pop community, debates persist. Should all lyrics be pre-screened for possible religious or cultural offense? Where is the line between playful parody and harmful stereotyping? When a brand evokes a group’s style without official partnership, is that clever marketing or unfair appropriation? And perhaps most crucially, how can fans and creators correct misinformation without fueling even more division?

If a single lyric or a color scheme can ignite global debate, what responsibility do artists, brands, and fans have in making sure the conversation stays grounded in fact, not rumor?