PR Lessons Learned From The Beijing Olympics With PR Suggestions For The Future
Arthur Solomon
Much of the criticism about the recently concluded Beijing Olympics was directed at NBCUniversal for soft-peddling the human rights and censorship tactics of its business partner, the totalitarian Chinese government, during its lead-up to and during its televising of the games.
Because of the years-long criticism by U.S. and other democratic countries and human rights organizations, the usual hullabaloo of “proud sponsors” promotions made less of a ripple in the U.S. than one drop of rain does in the South China Sea.
Sponsors of the 2021 Summer Olympic Games in Tokyo had to cancel promotional plans because of the Covid-19 outbreak.
Likewise, sponsors of the 2022 Beijing Winter Olympics did the same -- but the cut backs were not limited to the continuing Covid-19 pandemic. Accusations of human rights violations in China, paired with a diplomatic boycott spearheaded by the United States, kept most Olympic sponsors from tooting their horns, as they normally do, when spending big bucks on Olympic sponsorships.
A prime example was how Coca-Cola, the longest-standing partner of the Olympic Movement, and supporter of the games since 1928, had to mute plans after the U.S. announced a diplomatic boycott of the Beijing games.
While publicly supporting the games in totalitarian China, Coke, like other U.S. sponsors, Proctor & Gamble, Airbnb, Intel and Visa, kept quiet about its sponsorship in the U.S. Instead of splashy, big budget PR programs, some U.S. Olympic sponsors limited their connection to the Beijing games to TV commercials which displayed the Olympics games logo.
There are important lessons to be learned and remembered by PR pros from the criticism that NBC and the game’s “proud sponsors” received from U.S. government officials and human rights groups. But these lessons also apply to all “glam” tie-ins.
- A tie-in with a client and a “glamour” partner, such as the Olympics and other major sports events, will not protect a company from receiving negative publicity. In this case the negative publicity that NBC and it partners received was triggered by political leaders and human rights organizations attacking China’s human rights violations, causing many companies to refrain from their usual “happy talk” promotions
- When considering a tie-in with glamour organizations, the restrictions on what a client can do must be considered.
- When considering an association with a glamour organization, the negatives as well as the positives aspects of the partnership must be considered. Too often, starry-eyed people do not consider the negatives.
- When considering recommending a tie-in with a glamour account like the Olympics or Super Bowl, or other high visibility events, the PR person must consider if the client’s message will get lost in the clutter of other company’s promotions.
- No matter how carefully a program is planned, as poet Robert Burns wrote in “To a Mouse,” “The best laid schemes o’ mice an’ men / Gang aft a-gley.”
- Suggesting a partnership with a prestigious organization will not protect a client from receiving negative media coverage.
- Negative news will always drown out positive news.
- The fewer the sponsors of an event, the easier it is to gain earned media.
- The size of a corporation will not protect it from criticism and negative publicity.
That there would be years-long criticism of holding the games in a totalitarian country should not have come as a surprise to sponsors of the Beijing Olympics and their PR people.
Because even when the games are held in a democratic country special interest groups vocally protest against the waste of money that could better be used to help everyone instead of just a few thousand athletes. Nevertheless, because of the excitement of working on a program with an Olympic tie-in – and other glam projects-- the negative aspects of being associated with a project that is certain to result in negative media coverage is ignored.
It’s too late for PR people to re-do Beijing Olympic publicity programs. But it’s not too early to begin planning for the 2024 Olympic Games, which will be held in Paris and is certain to be a target of protesters.
There are several tactics that sponsors should consider that might protect them from the sure to come negative media coverage, and might at least lessen the attacks from special interest groups: • Sponsors should sit down with activist groups in host countries to hear their grievances and take them into consideration before planning their media strategy. • Sponsors should appoint an ombudsman to maintain continuous contact with activist groups in the years prior to and during the Olympics and other international sports events. • Sponsors should insist that activist groups’ peaceful protests in host countries are not stifled by authoritarian governments. • Sponsors must demonstrate that sponsoring sporting events does not mean that they are automatically dismissing activists’ groups concerns. This can be done by allotting a portion of the sponsor’s web sites to post Op-Eds on which activist groups can state their case. Another section would be devoted to posting print and TV stories about any protests.
While the above suggestions will undoubtedly be ridiculed by the overwhelming majority, if not by all Olympic sponsors, enacting some of the suggestions would position a company as being a concerned entity that is not a captive of the stale International Olympic Committee’s ridiculous assertions that politics has no place in sports, even though sports – and the Olympics in particular – have always been used by totalitarian governments as public relations tools.
It would also position the company as a forward-thinking business that has an open mind and is willing to listen to all viewpoints, giving what sponsors want, in addition to sales, and never receive except in their own house publications, sustained positive media coverage.
Will enacting some of these suggestions protect a company in the future or lessen attacks by activist groups? Maybe, maybe not. But at the very least, it is certain that their Olympic messages will not be lost in the clutter of others, and provide a platform which a company can use to obtain favorable publicity for as long as it wants to.
About the Author: Arthur Solomon, a former journalist, was a senior VP/senior counselor at Burson-Marsteller, and was responsible for restructuring, managing and playing key roles in some of the most significant national and international sports and non-sports programs. He also traveled internationally as a media adviser to high-ranking government officials. He now is a frequent contributor to public relations publications, consults on public relations projects and was on the Seoul Peace Prize nominating committee. He has been a key player on Olympic marketing programs and also has worked at high-level positions directly for Olympic organizations. He can be reached at arthursolomon4pr (at) juno.com
