The linked rings on every Chinese Coke bottle and the leaping athletes on each McDonald’s paper bag testify to the power the world’s biggest corporations believe this summer’s Olympics wields.
But having spent huge sums, the companies sponsoring the Beijing Games are about to find themselves the targets of a new, more vigorous war on China’s human-rights record by campaigners boosted by the success of protests along the torch relay route.
On Tuesday a coalition of Tibetan groups warned Coca-Cola that it would be “complicit in a humanitarian disaster” unless it used its influence to ensure Tibet was dropped from the torch route. And on Wednesday, Dream for Darfur launched a critical “report card” on sponsors of the Games.
Campaigners are urging companies to press the International Olympic Committee and Beijing itself for change — or risk damaging their brands.
“Companies [who do not act] will get physical protests; they will get letters; we will ask people to turn off their adverts,” said Ellen Freudenheim, director of corporate outreach at Dream for Darfur, which argues that they should press China to put pressure on Sudan as its major oil buyer.
“Sponsors don’t make policy and we understand that. But combined they have about the equivalent of the GDP of Canada, the world’s eighth-largest economy; they have government affairs offices; they have lobbying firms; they have international presences — and they all do engage in politics,” she said.
TARGETING STARS
Canny activists are targeting the stars who represent the brands too — George Clooney has already said he has raised the issue of Darfur with Omega, the Olympic sponsor and watch manufacturer that he advertises. The aim is to create a domino effect as spokespeople or consumers pressure sponsors, who in turn push the International Olympic Committee (IOC) into lobbying China.
Each of the 12 global partners for this year’s event have paid £30 million (US$59.3 million) to £40 million for a four-year deal.
“A number of companies engage in partnerships with the IOC and the Olympic Movement to help us fund the work we do and spread the Olympic values. Their support is key not only to the success of the Olympic Games but also to the sustainability of the Olympic Movement,” an IOC spokeswoman said on Tuesday.
In the period 2001 to 2004, sponsors contributed US$1,459 million, 39 percent of the IOC’s revenue.
Activists believe their protests are already having an effect. The angry reception afforded the Beijing torch relay in London, Paris and San Francisco earlier this month caused acute discomfort to the relay sponsors Coca-Cola, Lenovo and Samsung.
Last week, Human Rights Watch accused “cowardly” partners of “remaining largely silent” in the face of abuses; just a few days earlier the media freedom body Reporters Without Borders disrupted Coca-Cola’s annual general meeting.
RISK FACTOR
Campaigners say some sponsors are raising concerns privately.
“Realistically, everyone who signed up for Beijing knew there were various risks involved,” said Damien Ryan, a Hong Kong-based media consultant advising several sponsors.
He acknowledged that this “risk factor has escalated.”
Activists are well aware that multinationals hope sponsoring the Beijing Games will give them privileged access to 1.3 billion increasingly wealthy people without entrenched purchasing habits.
“Almost all of the top level sponsors want to leverage the games to a better market position in China,” said David Wolf, president of Beijing-based corporate advisers Wolf Group Asia.
Olympic sponsors argue it is simply unfair to hold them responsible for every action by the Chinese authorities.
The sportswear giant Adidas, a Beijing rather than IOC partner, said in a statement it was “conscious of the exceptional importance of the protection of human rights.”
“Sponsors, however, should not be expected to solve political issues. We clearly see the limits of our influence,” Adidas said.
A Coca-Cola spokesperson pointed out that the soft drinks giant had supported the Olympics since 1928, expressed “deep concern” for the situation in Tibet and cited its support for charities working in Sudan.
Amnesty has asked all Beijing games partners to raise human rights concerns directly with the IOC and Beijing.
“The universal declaration on human rights calls on every individual and organ of society, which includes corporations, to ensure human rights are respected. Corporations do have influence, and we would call on them to exert it publicly,” said Robert Gooden, Amnesty’s Asian-Pacific campaign coordinator.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS