Ask Johnson & Johnson, General Electric, Panasonic, Kodak, McDonald’s and many other sponsors how they’re dealing with pressure from human rights activists ahead of the Beijing Olympics, and the answer is as bland as cafeteria meatloaf.
Almost without exception they say that sponsors of the Olympic Games are not responsible for influencing government policy. Such work is best left to governments, governmental organizations or the United Nations.
It’s not exactly a “no comment,” say public relations experts, but it’s close.
“It’s putting your head in the sand,” said Mike Paul, president of MGP and Associates PR, a New York agency that specializes in crisis management. “These groups and reporters are not asking for the U.N.’s response. If they want a U.N. response, they’d be standing in front of the U.N. They’re looking for a truthful answer.”
Protesters denounce the Beijing Games outside
the Myanmar Embassy in Washington, D.C.
Though nearly a dozen internal and external public relations executives associated with Olympic sponsors acknowledged that they are expending more energy on crisis-management planning than before any other recent Olympics, few would elaborate on how they plan to deal with a crisis if one emerges or how they feel about the International Olympic Committee’s responsiveness to activist organizations.
“We certainly are concerned,” said Kodak spokesman Christopher Veronda, who acknowledged that the company has expressed those concerns to the IOC in the last month. “Our response is not something we dreamed up yesterday.”
That said, the standard response of Kodak and many other sponsors has failed to appease critics with organizations such as Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and Mia Farrow’s Olympic Dream for Darfur campaign.
The groups continue to link human rights abuses to the Beijing Games and show no sign of easing pressure on the IOC and Olympic sponsors.
In the last year, each organization has called on sponsors to speak out against abuses. Human Rights Watch has encouraged sponsors to speak to Chinese leaders behind the scenes in order to advance human rights in the country; Amnesty International has written TOP sponsors and asked them to engage the Chinese government and speak out against human rights abuses such as abductions of activists in China and forced evictions for Olympic developments; and Dream for Darfur has asked sponsors to do several things, from meeting with Mia Farrow to making a direct or public appeal to the Chinese government.
Dream for Darfur will release its second report card grading 19 sponsors on those efforts later this month.
| |
|
|
| |
Mia Farrow’s organization requested information from 19 Olympic sponsors on the degree to which they have addressed the humanitarian crisis in Sudan. The organization wrote that most sponsors were in silent complicity with the crisis in Darfur because they were not raising the issue with China, the host of the Olympics. |
|
| |
Company |
Grade |
|
| |
Adidas |
C |
|
| |
Anheuser-Busch |
F |
|
| |
Atos Origin |
F |
|
| |
BHP Billiton |
F |
|
| |
Coca-Cola |
D |
|
| |
Eastman Kodak |
F |
|
| |
General Electric |
C+ |
|
| |
Johnson & Johnson |
D+ |
|
| |
Lenovo Group Limited |
F |
|
| |
Manulife |
F |
|
| |
McDonald’s |
C |
|
| |
Microsoft |
F |
|
| |
Panasonic |
F |
|
| |
Samsung |
F |
|
| |
Staples |
F |
|
| |
Swatch/Omega |
F |
|
| |
UPS |
D |
|
| |
Visa |
F |
|
| |
Volkswagen |
F |
|
| |
Source: Released by Olympic Dream for Darfur Nov. 26, 2007 |
|
“The calculation (that sponsors) have to make is can they last until August with this growing public scrutiny and exposure,” said Jill Savitt, director of the Dream for Darfur campaign. “We’re only going to gain momentum.”
Activists’ efforts have thrust sponsors into a catch-22 situation. They face mounting pressure in the world’s most lucrative market, the U.S., to take a stand, but risk exclusion or alienation in the world’s fastest-growing market, China, if they take a position critical of the Chinese government.
Sports marketers call the predicament a public relations challenge and play down the possibility that human rights concerns will damage brands associated with the Olympics. But public relations experts say there is still a risk and advise sponsors to address the issue, not avoid it.
Some sponsors aggressively highlight their social responsibility efforts in response to concerns raised by activist groups. Kodak points out that it donated $7 million over seven years to U.N. crisis relief efforts; GE notes its $4 million donation to Darfur refugees; and Coke highlights its plan to spend $5 million in Sudan.
But public relations experts say the sponsors’ crisis planning must go beyond addressing current criticisms to encompass contingency plans.
Paul said sponsors should be prepared to respond if their brand is associated with a human-rights violation in even the most indirect way, such as if a protest occurs next to a sign with their brand’s logo.
“If you can cover the worst-case scenario, you’ve protected your brand and its reputation,” Paul said. “If you haven’t, you’ve opened yourself up to a lot bigger loss on your investment.”
Lanny Davis, head of Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe’s legal crisis management department, advised sponsors to continue to affirm the principles of the Olympics and emphasize how supporting the Games brings attention to human rights.
In India this month, a poster condemns
the Beijing Games on the eve of
Tibetan Uprising Day.
“The reality is people will boycott their products and be dissidents,” he said. “It’s unfair, but the best way to handle it is to highlight how the Olympics helps improve human rights by engaging people on the issue.”
Coca-Cola and Adidas, which respectively sponsor the IOC and Beijing Olympic Organizing Committee, already have committed to many of these steps. Both companies’ communications departments are committed to engaging interest groups in an effort to determine whether it is within their company’s ability to act.
A Coca-Cola meeting with Dream for Darfur last year inspired the company toreinvest all of its profits from concentrate sales in Sudan back into the community. The company expects to contribute $5 million over the next five years as a result.
“This is an evolving strategy,” said Coca-Cola spokeswoman Kerry Kerr. “In many cases, we have no influence over a sovereign nation. What we can do is meet with the IOC to share [nongovernmental organizations’] concerns and ask that they meet with those groups.”
While the IOC has been outspoken about environmental concerns in Beijing, it repeatedly has distanced itself from human rights issues by saying it isn’t a political organization. It has met with a half-dozen nongovernmental organizations in an effort to understand their concerns about the Olympics in China and tried to support sponsors by reinforcing their assertion that backing the Olympics doesn’t give corporations the right to interfere with sovereign nations.
“Ultimately, the IOC is playing a positive role through engendering the conversations that are going on ahead of these Games,” said IOC spokeswoman Giselle Davies.
The success of the IOC, Coke, Adidas and others in spreading that message will determine whether their investment in the Olympics delivers the gold that sponsors have come to expect from their affiliation with the Games.
“You don’t want to just win in this investment,” Paul said. “You want a win-win-win. You don’t want to be part of the crisis, but part of the response.”
Mike Paul
President
MGP & Associates
A 19-year communications veteran, Mike Paul founded MGP and Associates PR in 1994. The boutique firm has developed a reputation for its crisis planning and reputation management. Its clients have included Merrill Lynch, United Airlines and Pfizer. Paul is a member of the National Sports Marketing Network and writes a public relations blog called The Reputation Doctor.
♦ Think worst-case-scenario and develop a solid plan.
Even before a corporation signs a contract to sponsor the Olympic Games, it should understand both the risks and rewards of such an opportunity. Many of the risks include risks to the brand and reputation of the entire corporation. Hire a seasoned crisis public relations and reputation management consultant to develop a comprehensive crisis preparedness plan and outline not only the risks, but solutions to major concerns. Think of your crisis PR investment as insurance surrounding your Olympic sponsorship. Every excellent crisis preparedness plan includes a war-room strategy for worst-case-scenario situations and outlines the actual corporate and consultant crisis team with roles for each for proper planning and communication during an actual crisis. This plan needs to include role-play exercises for the entire crisis team, including the CEO and board.
♦ Putting your head in the sand never works.
If you’ve invested in an Olympic sponsorship as a public corporation, you have a public responsibility to answer difficult questions affecting the Olympic Games. This includes answering tough questions from activists protesting the Olympic Games regarding human rights violations and serious environmental issues in China. If the global media and activists are interested, then your corporate shareholders and consumers buying your brands will also be concerned.
♦ Spin is a lie and will only backfire.
Spin is a four-letter word for a reason. The truth always bubbles to the top, and it is much more effective for the truth to come proactively from your own lips than to be forced out of your mouth or worse — to come from someone else because you were trying to hide it.
♦ Attorneys should never lead in the court of public opinion.
An attorney’s job is to limit liability, while a PR executive’s job is to best build, maintain or repair a corporate brand. Although the legal team should have a voice, they should never lead when dealing with a crisis. Many attorneys think no comment is the best approach to limiting liability. That might work in the court of law, but it will kill you in the court of public opinion.
♦ Proactively meet with activist groups and make donations to global causes.
Establish a track record of doing the right thing before the Games begin. Some activists groups only seek to tear down corporations, while others truly are seeking solutions. Work with activist groups truly seeking solutions and research their track record first. Make donations to worthy causes, like global organizations fighting for human rights and environmental issues, including in China. Prior investments with these activist issues only in the U.S., for example, won’t be enough to calm global activists’ concerns.
