As iconic events including the Olympics become lightning rods for campaigners, companies must shape up or face being burnt
For campaigners, as for corporations, the 2012 Olympics present a unique advertising opportunity. Three weeks of back-to-back global media coverage. When better to get your message out?
The report might have won more headlines had another, larger ethics-related Olympics story not cropped up. It turns out that Dow Chemical is among the dozens of big brand sponsors of the London games. The US company is inextricably linked to the 1984 Bhopal gas disaster via its association with the culprit, Union Carbide, which it acquired in 2001.
Down on Dow
Five campaign groups representing the victims of the tragedy are demanding that the London Organising Committee of the Olympics (Locog) cancel Dow’s sponsorship. If it doesn’t, they say they’ll hold their own “Bhopal Olympics” – with competitors drawn from the ranks of those disabled by the disaster.
Both campaigns are unashamedly publicity-seeking. Anna McMullen, campaigns coordinator for Labour Behind the Label, which authored the Play Fair report, makes no apology. “There are media hooks and you go with it.”
It’s a fair point. A search of the Guardian newspaper reveals similar strategically timed campaigns. “Children exploited in Olympics goods factories, says TUC [Trades Union Congress]” reads one. “Sportswear firms to investigate Oxfam sweatshop claims,” reads another. The first dates from the eve of the 2004 Athens Olympics; the second from Beijing 2008.
To its credit, Locog has not dismissed such criticisms as PR stunts. Way back in November 2008, it published a Sustainable Sourcing Code. Since then, it’s been working with key suppliers to educate them on the Code’s provisions, which draw heavily on the Ethical Trading Initiative (ETI).
Certainly the sportswear industry is far from perfect. Locog’s procurement efforts no doubt have their failures too. Yet they represent a move by the Olympics to use its weight to improve supplier performance. It behoves the International Olympic Committee to ensure future games’ organisers build on this momentum.
The Dow sponsorship spat reveals another, cruder way in which the Olympics can improve corporate practices. Companies are not daft. They know that allying themselves to an iconic event will place them in the limelight. This is of course a risk. Dow chose to run it, and perhaps now wishes it had not.
Media-led campaign scrutiny is an undoubted force for good. Skeletons are being eased out of corporate cupboards. And that has to be a good thing.
A good example is Coca-Cola. Once a favourite target of corporate critics, the US mega-brand is using the games to trumpet its environmental credentials. Among a ten-point Sustainable Games strategy is a commitment to zero waste and 100% recyclable bottles for its drinks.
If Coca-Cola’s claims are greenwash, then expect campaigners to raise the roof. If they are genuine, however, then at least some credit has to be given to the global spotlight that is the Olympics.