Is Kellogg's quietly answering critics?

Darren Rovell put Kellogg's to task last month when they conveniently announced they would not renew Michael Phelp's endorsement contract after "the bong picture" surfaced. There was still time left on the contract, and Kellogg's remarked that they would simply not renew, and let it run its course. We debated in class the merits of Kellogg's position. Were they just taking advantage of a publicity opportunity to denounce the acts of Phelps, without putting any real action behind it? In other words, Rovell challenged them to pull product from the shelves, if in fact, they really were appalled by Phelps' behavior.

So now, Kellogg's is still mum on the topic but Rovell has reported that the San Francisco Food Bank is receiving about 3,800 pounds of Kellogg's cereal product, an amount that could make them eligible for a $15,000 tax deduction. Another potential publicity stunt, or just quietly responding to a call to back up their vocal denouncement of Phelps with some real consciously-motivated action?