For many American companies, being an Olympic sponsor is an important part of their branding and advertising strategies.
This summer the Olympic will be held in China. Already demonstrations and activists are using this event to gather attention to their causes. They are protesting China's human rights record, its involvement in Sudan's ethnic fighting and its environmental record. They're chasing the Olympic torch. The volume is sure to get louder as the Olympics near.
Using the protest vote (often in the form of a commercial boycott) to punish sponsors is the American way. Over the years, many radio and TV sponsors have pulled their support from controversial shows rather than take a hit from negative publicity. It's an effective form of protest.
It stands to reason that Olympic sponsors may be opening themselves up to great scrutiny from protest groups and, if the protests have the intended effect, the greater population. Should these corporations have an Olympic strategy? Should they consider the risks they are taking in aligning themselves with these Olympic games? How should they downplay their relationship with the Chinese government?
It depends on how much attention the U.S. media gives to the protesters. Already the press is paying a great deal of attention. Last Sunday the New York Times Sunday Magazine had a lengthy feature on Dream for Darfur, a small activist group that is using the Olympics to further spread its message. The group is calling it the "Genocide Olympics" and plans to put pressure on Olympic sponsors. Here is how the group put it:
"These companies aren’t pushing guns in anyone’s faces” in Darfur, says Ellen Freudenheim, a consultant working on corporate outreach for Dream for Darfur. “We have to be careful in how we frame this. They are not directly responsible. Yet the morality is, You are complicit when you do nothing to try to stop genocide when you can."
The issue of Darfur is not just for small, fringe activist groups. Steven Spielberg quit his job as artistic adviser to the Olympic Games over China's relationship with the Sudanese government.
Said Brad Greiner, co-founder of Team Darfur (a coalition of athletes who support Darfur refugees):
Companies need to release a statement addressing the issue of Darfurand say 'As a major worldwide corporation, we feel we need to play a positive role in ending the genocide.' If they want to get positive media from the Olympic Games, they should take into account what the world is asking.
Not only is Darfur an issue that could end up hurting U.S. sponsors, but so are the current demonstrations in Tibet. Americans have a soft spot for the once independent region -- after all, Brad Pitt made a movie about an exhibition there -- and are offended by the harsh reaction by the Chinese government. The protests in the region are timed such that all eyes are on the Olympic host. Yesterday, protesters tried to grab the Olympic torch as it passed through the streets of London. One protester tried to put out the torch with a fire extinguisher. French President Nicolas Sarkozy has threatened to boycott the Olympic Games' opening ceremony unless the Chinese government begins a dialog with the Dalai Lama.
In 1993, the American Family Association made headlines when it protested the content of the television show "NYPD Blue." Full-page newspapers ads called the show "soft-core pornography." Blue chip advertisers shied away from the show even though it was a ratings hit.
That ruckus could pale in comparison to Olympic-related protests. Sponsors should prepare for the worst.
