advertising and other stuff. no, really.

Thursday, February 18, 2010

Area 41—the "official" Olympics no-fly zone.

Sponsorship of the Super Bowl and Olympics costs a lot of money. Because of that, *guerilla* marketing takes on a new meaning during those events. Brands who don’t want to pay hefty licensing fees associated with “official” logos and the “official sponsor” designations try and siphon off some of that buzz by association for themselves.

Nothing new here; brands have been doing that for a long time. (Look at the Super Bowl to see how brands like Mancrunch or GoDaddy co-opt the event by saying their “Super Bowl” spot was rejected, knowing it never had a chance.)

It’s worse with the Olympics because no athlete can participate in the games if they have a sponsor promoting them—and not the actual event. Forget the motive being about amateur vs. pro status and the sanctity of the games. That dream died decades ago with other countries that routinely sent their professionals while we got our collective asses kicked.

No, this is all about the International Olympic Committee and the United States Olympic Committee wanting theirs:

Except as permitted by the IOC Executive Board, no competitor, coach, trainer or official who participates in the Olympic Games may allow his person, name, picture or sports performances to be used for advertising purposes during the Olympic Games.”

The entry or participation of a competitor in the Olympic Games shall not be conditional on any financial consideration.

One of the USOC’s guiding principles:

“The practice of sport is a human right. Every individual must have the possibility of practicing sport, without discrimination of any kind…” (IOC Charter, Fundamental Principles, #4)

Except as permitted. Shall not be conditional. Without discrimination of any kind. Looks like a financial payday slash lucrative sponsorship qualifies as an exemption.


No comments: