[MissNewfarm]

I´m working on a very interesting project for my Master degree in London where I examine how companies such as McDonald´s and Coca-Cola can sponsor the olympics. Is it okay that this organised event, promoting sport, healthy eating and being a good role model, is sponsored by brands promoting the exact opposite? Should the organisers exclude such sponsors even if they will suffer a significant financial loss?

Please let me know your thoughts!

[italienmoose]

Surely sponsoring a sports event is exactly the right thing to do seeing as people that eat at McDonald's too much probably also need to play more sports?

[bax121]

People always criticize the 'junk' food and drinks companies for sponsoring sports events etc. but tbh I don't get it.

There is nothing wrong with McDonalds or Coke in moderation yet the problem is over consumption and not enough excersize and by helping to fund sports events they encourage greater participation which can only be a good thing.

If anything it is ethical of these companies to be spending their profits on encouraging overall healthier lifestyles.

[RawJoh1]

(Original post by bax121)
There is nothing wrong with McDonalds or Coke in moderation yet the problem is over consumption and not enough excersize and by helping to fund sports events they encourage greater participation which can only be a good thing.

This argument works for small events that otherwise would not happen. But the Olympics? The World Cup? You telling me that if Maccy Ds couldn't sponsor the Olympics, another firm or set of firms wouldn't pony up the cash? Seems implausible.


Personally, I don't really care. It's a small issue. If the govt was serious about obesity, stopping junk food brand sponsoring sports events would not be at the top of the policy shopping list.

[The Phelps]

It's only when it's taken out of moderation that I think it poses any issue to society. (As the above poster said.)

I suppose it depends what you think the Olympics is for really. I think the Olympics is to celebrate the great sporting achievers in every nation while reducing international and racial tensions. If we need large corporations such as McDonalds to finance such an event them I have no issue with it!

If you see the Olympics as an event that is there to promote sport then I can see why you wouldn't select McDonalds as your first sponsor, but it's hardly a fast food that makes you unable to compete in sports. There media campaign is strong, but I don't think anyone has ever watched a 100 metre sprint and then saw a McDonalds advert and thought that's what I can eat to run faster.

People who have an issue with it in my opinion haven't really though it through. Besides without those sorts of companies the Olympics probably wouldn't be half as successful if it even continued to run. An Olympics with a McDonalds advert is better than no Olympics because it couldn't get financed.

[RawJoh1]

(Original post by The Phelps)
An Olympics with a McDonalds advert is better than no Olympics because it couldn't get financed.

Evidence plz.

This is the same argument that said F1 would go bust without tobacco advertising. Hasn't happened.

[illusionz]

The problem is not in junk food advertising, it is in education.

[The Phelps]

(Original post by RawJoh1)
Evidence plz.

This is the same argument that said F1 would go bust without tobacco advertising. Hasn't happened.

It was said more as a hypothetical point to consider that it provides great financing for the sporting event. What evidence do you want me to show exactly? Even if I pulled up the sponsorship figures for the Olympics what would I achieve? I can't predict whether or not other companies would take up their place in sponsoring or not.

I'm more interested in why you think they shouldn't be able to sponsor the Olympics. At least that's the vibe I got from your demand for evidence.

[McHumpy92]

(Original post by MissNewfarm)
I´m working on a very interesting project for my Master degree in London where I examine how companies such as McDonald´s and Coca-Cola can sponsor the olympics. Is it okay that this organised event, promoting sport, healthy eating and being a good role model, is sponsored by brands promoting the exact opposite? Should the organisers exclude such sponsors even if they will suffer a significant financial loss?

Please let me know your thoughts!

Usain Bolt ate McDonalds before winning the olympic 100m's and breaking the world record. Athletes don't eat like saints, only if they're cutting for a particular reason.

[jhubbert]

I wouldn't say it was un-ethical, just a bit ironic. The fact of the matter is that these big multi-national companies are the ones with the money to burn and big events like the Olympics are great opportunities for them to market their key brands. If they weren't to sponsor the Olympics, people would still drink Coca-Cola or eat McDonalds.

[MissNewfarm]

(Original post by RawJoh1)
This argument works for small events that otherwise would not happen. But the Olympics? The World Cup? You telling me that if Maccy Ds couldn't sponsor the Olympics, another firm or set of firms wouldn't pony up the cash? Seems implausible.


Personally, I don't really care. It's a small issue. If the govt was serious about obesity, stopping junk food brand sponsoring sports events would not be at the top of the policy shopping list.

I think that´s the issue: Only a few sponsors can contribute with as much money as McDonald´s and Coca-Cola. Maybe it´s better to have them as sponsors than not being able to arrange the event at all. I´m considering it to be an ethical dilemma in the UK because obesity cost £4.2 billion every year. It doesn´t make sense that the Government is encouraging both sides but then again, it´s the money issue...

Thank you for responding!

[MissNewfarm]

(Original post by The Phelps)
It's only when it's taken out of moderation that I think it poses any issue to society. (As the above poster said.)

I suppose it depends what you think the Olympics is for really. I think the Olympics is to celebrate the great sporting achievers in every nation while reducing international and racial tensions. If we need large corporations such as McDonalds to finance such an event them I have no issue with it!

If you see the Olympics as an event that is there to promote sport then I can see why you wouldn't select McDonalds as your first sponsor, but it's hardly a fast food that makes you unable to compete in sports. There media campaign is strong, but I don't think anyone has ever watched a 100 metre sprint and then saw a McDonalds advert and thought that's what I can eat to run faster.

People who have an issue with it in my opinion haven't really though it through. Besides without those sorts of companies the Olympics probably wouldn't be half as successful if it even continued to run. An Olympics with a McDonalds advert is better than no Olympics because it couldn't get financed.

Some very good points! Thank you

[RawJoh1]

(Original post by The Phelps)
It was said more as a hypothetical point to consider that it provides great financing for the sporting event. What evidence do you want me to show exactly? Even if I pulled up the sponsorship figures for the Olympics what would I achieve? I can't predict whether or not other companies would take up their place in sponsoring or not.

I'm more interested in why you think they shouldn't be able to sponsor the Olympics. At least that's the vibe I got from your demand for evidence.

The point is we're talking about a MASSIVE event. It almost certainly won't have trouble attracting sponsorship, even if you prohibit fast food brands. We're not talking about sponsoring a Sunday league football team where beggars can't be choosers. We're talking about the Olympics. So the evidence I want is evidence to the effect that the Olympics find it very hard to get sufficient sponsorship.

As I said a few posts above, I don't really care about the issue. It's small beer. But the reasoning is fairly straightforward. Maccy D's etc promote products that are often not socially useful (and yes, I agree that this is because people don't eat them in moderation blah blah blah). We want to minimise this, especially as there's an obesity epidemic in the Western world. It's not ridiculous logic, even if I think that the issue is small beer and there are better things for the govt to think about re: public health and obesity.

[NB_ide]

(Original post by MissNewfarm)
I´m working on a very interesting project for my Master degree in London where I examine how companies such as McDonald´s and Coca-Cola can sponsor the olympics. Is it okay that this organised event, promoting sport, healthy eating and being a good role model, is sponsored by brands promoting the exact opposite? Should the organisers exclude such sponsors even if they will suffer a significant financial loss?

Please let me know your thoughts!

Who says that's what the olympics is about? "Healthy eating" has got very little to do with becoming a top-flight athlete, and indeed the rest of what they put into the mouths (or arms) is hardly very healthy either. There's nothing "healthy" about olympic-level sport, tbh. Though perhaps we mortals like to pretend so.
As for being a good role model, what's that got to do with coke and McD's or how does it clash with what they offer?

What's "wrong" with coke and McD's anyway, exactly?

[SleepySheep]

Coke is so good

I agree it seems like a pretty weird choice. I guess they could argue it's okay 'cause McDonalds sells salad and coke is made from vegetable extracts

[Somerandomstudent]

I wouldn't call it unethical... but I would call it incredibly ironic!

[ArcadiaHouse]

Adele is also performing at the Closing Ceremony ...

[MasterPotatoHead]

Well someone's gotta give the Americans a hand

[MissNewfarm]

(Original post by RawJoh1)
The point is we're talking about a MASSIVE event. It almost certainly won't have trouble attracting sponsorship, even if you prohibit fast food brands. We're not talking about sponsoring a Sunday league football team where beggars can't be choosers. We're talking about the Olympics. So the evidence I want is evidence to the effect that the Olympics find it very hard to get sufficient sponsorship.

As I said a few posts above, I don't really care about the issue. It's small beer. But the reasoning is fairly straightforward. Maccy D's etc promote products that are often not socially useful (and yes, I agree that this is because people don't eat them in moderation blah blah blah). We want to minimise this, especially as there's an obesity epidemic in the Western world. It's not ridiculous logic, even if I think that the issue is small beer and there are better things for the govt to think about re: public health and obesity.

Thank you so much for this viewpoint! McDonald´s and coca-cola have very long contracts with the Olympic games so I don´t think the probability of other sponsors have ever been tested...

[MissNewfarm]

(Original post by NB_ide)
Who says that's what the olympics is about? "Healthy eating" has got very little to do with becoming a top-flight athlete, and indeed the rest of what they put into the mouths (or arms) is hardly very healthy either. There's nothing "healthy" about olympic-level sport, tbh. Though perhaps we mortals like to pretend so.
As for being a good role model, what's that got to do with coke and McD's or how does it clash with what they offer?

What's "wrong" with coke and McD's anyway, exactly?

I think many people, and certainly I, disagree with you on this. Many top athletes claim that food is actually more important than training when aiming for good results in sports. I´m not going to go through the whole protein, carbohydrate and fat discussion here but when you exercise 3-6 hours a day, your body need very specific nutrition to be able to restore and perform.

many athletes have been caught using performance enhancing drugs and that is of course part of the discussion here. Cheating to be the best can hardly be considered ethical. Nonetheless, when obesity in the UK costs £4.2 billion annually one might argue that it´s not very ethical to "tempt" people with McDonald´s and Coca- Cola, which has been blamed for encouraging obesity with very unhealthy food/drinks. Some people argue that there´s nothing wrong with there products as long as you consume it in small amounts but for those who fail to do so: Both brands promote food and drinks consisting mainly of empty calories with extreme amounts of fat, sugar and salt. consuming large amounts of this food will result in obesity which again risks multiple diseases. I agree that The Olympics is not promoting healthy eating directly but a sports event with the best athletes in the world do so indirectly.