ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Media & Entertainment Law Blogs -> Sports Biz

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Media & Entertainment Law

: Sports Biz

Olympic Sponsors Face Darfur, Tibet Protests

By Mark

ADVERTISEMENTS

The current funding model for the Olympics requires a substantial investment from the corporate sector in the form of sponsorships, often to the tune of $100 million and up for the foundation sponsors like Coke, McDonalds and Lenovo, and that is true even if the Games are held in a Communist nation like China. In fact, access to the billions of Chinese substantially raised the price of sponsorships for this summer's Games.

Now, however, those sponsors are facing an unexpected political and business crisis in the form of rising protest over China's involvement in the ongoing genocide in Darfur and the mounting protests in Tibet. In addition, the Games were awarded to China upon promises to the IOC of substantial improvements in human rights treatment in China and now those promises have been ignored.

The Games themselves may be marred by a substantial military presence to prevent Tibetan protests. Athletes may boycott Beijing in protest over Tibet or Darfur. IOC president Jacques Rogge, taking the same stance as each of his predecessor's when faced with the possibility that the Games may face the reality of world politics, told reporters that a boycott would only hurt athletes and "doesn't solve anything."

So, what do the sponsors do? Several plan to get together to discuss that very thing. They do plan to discuss their concerns privately with the Chinese, however, that doesn't satisfy the public need to be seen as doing something. The protesters need to know the sponsors have taken action, however ineffective it may be. Yet, the sponsors don't want to piss off the Chinese and risk being tossed out of the country. Ah, there is nothing like trying to do business with a dictatorial regime, hellbent on proving a point to a dissenting minority (Tibet) or doing deals with the devil for oil (Darfur)

There may not be good options for Western companies in this situation. To be seen to be kowtowing to the Chinese is to risk a consumer boycott. It may be an effective way to stay in the Chinese market, which is not yet a mature one for consumer products and has yet to reach the size of the US and the EU. To walk away in order to satisfy a vocal minority and to embrace a worthwhile principal may be conceding that market to your rivals for at least a generation. Will the goodwill you earn in your home market make up for the loss of China? Will you actually lose China if you just walk away? Hard questions with no easy answers - but it's what happens when you do business with maintain no illusions about democracy, human rights or basic freedom.

Full post as published by Sports Biz on March 18, 2008 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0127 secs (new cache)