Not one single person has gotten it so far. And by "it" I mean the meaning behind using the word "code" and why they're talking about "tigers, cathedrals, and snowcones".
Short version: you're taking it way too literally.
Long version: Videos such as these have one purpose - to convey a message and spark interest through it. You don't do this will literal, plain language. Very few people will be attracted by that. So, what do they do? They take a word or two that has to do with the subject (DNA, code), and generalize and slightly "redefine" the word. In doing this, the word becomes more welcoming and relatable. Please realize that the people behind this aren't literally talking about simply coding stuff. Rather, they're using the word "code" as a theme to help spark the interest of women and girls to get them interested in STEM fields.
Having been in one of the world's largest STEM related competitions at multiple levels for four years now (FIRST Robotics), I can safely say that the driving purpose behind this campaign is on-track - more women and girls do need to get into STEM. On my team (and on many other teams), the ratio of boys to girls was about 20:1. That's pretty small by comparison. Why is it important that we have females in STEM fields, you ask? Well, why is diversity good in anything like this? Because variation leads to better innovation, more ideas, etc. Not to mention, we don't need the only ones who know this stuff to be men; that in and of itself is ridiculous.
So, while I admit that there could be a slightly better word choice, maybe, I don't think this was a "fail" on Google's part. Google's too careful for that, especially in something like this where a failure should be easy to avoid.
