How corporate sponsors of the Beijing Games plan to deal with
mounting pressure from advocates for Darfur
BusinessWeek
February 28, 2008
The opening ceremonies for the Beijing Olympics will
take place on Aug. 8, and the weather in the Chinese capital is
sure to be steamy. But the games' corporate sponsors are already
feeling the heat. Human rights groups want multinationals to press
Beijing to seek an end to the killing in the Darfur region of
Sudan (PetroChina is a major investor in the African country).
That leaves companies in a bind: If they pipe up, they might offend
their Chinese hosts—and lose access to one of the world's
fastest-growing markets. If they don't, they risk appearing insensitive.
"It's a minefield for marketers," says Mike Paul, president
of public-relations firm MGP & Associates.
The pressure began last summer. A group called Dream for Darfur
asked 19 corporate sponsors to contact the International Olympic
Committee and the Chinese government about Darfur and to sign
a statement of concern about violence there. In November the group
released a "report card" evaluating whether companies
complied with its requests and whether they took any initiatives
to help Darfur's victims. The highest grade, a C+, went to General
Electric (GE). Coca-Cola
(KO) took home a D and Eastman
Kodak (EK) an F. The group will issue new report cards this
month and will then begin targeting those with low grades with
demonstrations, online videos, and stickers that read "Proud
Sponsor of the Genocide Olympics." "We will use our
elbows if it helps the people of Darfur," says actor Mia
Farrow, who chairs the group.
How should corporate sponsors respond to the unwanted attention?
Bob Marston, CEO of PR firm Robert Marston & Associates, counsels
companies to draft a public statement that promotes the Olympics'
potential to "build international understanding." They
should also clearly state that they don't believe "supporting
the Olympic Games is a direct or implied endorsement of Chinese
policy" and highlight their good deeds. Coke
(KO), for instance, plans to spend $5 million to fund water
projects in Darfur and is donating $2.25 million to the Red Cross
for relief to those displaced by violence. GE has contributed
$4 million for Darfur refugees.
However, none of the sponsors have gone as far as to retool their
marketing plans for the Olympics. And at least one has spoken
out against the activists' hardball tactics. Says Bob Corcoran,
GE vice-president of corporate citizenship: "Using the egregious
term genocide Olympics' is not fair to the athletes or to their
families." This war of words is just starting.
