Olympia: Olympic sportswashing: The sponsors of the IOC

Aditya Mittal wears sunglasses and flashes a big smile when he is seen in Paris these days. This was also the case during the torch relay on the day of the opening ceremony, when the 48-year-old proudly carried the Olympic torch, which his company had helped develop, through the French capital. He currently has a number of sponsor events coming up. Mittal is chairman of ArcelorMittal, a world leader in steel and a supporter of the Paris Games, which emphasize they will be the most sustainable ever.

The manager has to make sure to give a good impression in Paris: ArcelorMittal is one of the most important sponsors at these summer games, but it has also been controversial for years. The company is accused of damaging the climate and violating human rights. Most recently, sustainability-oriented NGOs called on various banks in June to stop lending money to ArcelorMittal. The reasons for this: In South Africa, Liberia, Mexico and Brazil, those who campaign for environmental protection are exposed to violence. The company also neglects the health of its workers and people in the local area. And at the end of 2023, more than 40 workers died in a mine fire in Kazakhstan.

The money from banks now also enables the steel giant to buy attention – as a sponsor of the Olympics, the largest sporting event in the world. ArcelorMittal emphasizes on its website that it wants to take human rights and climate protection seriously. Andrew Simms from the Badvertising campaign, which also criticizes sports sponsorship, is suspicious. In July, the economist said: »Several major sporting events, including the Olympic Games, have recently promised to be the greenest ever. But if you look at sport, it relies on the fossil fuel industry, the car sector or airlines. There is a huge conflict when sport is sponsored by polluters, who even destroy the basis for sport with their emissions. “They even pollute the air that athletes breathe,” says Simmons.

In addition to ArcelorMittal, Air France and Toyota are particularly criticized because of their impact on the climate. In addition, there are sponsors such as Coca Cola, whose core products have little positive effect on the human body. In this context, the term sportswashing comes up again and again, explains Sebastian Uhrich, sports economist at the German Sport University Cologne: “Sportswashing is used for a situation where brands have a dubious image, are somehow criticized, and where it is assumed that These explicitly negative associations should be improved or whitewashed.” In this respect, it ultimately describes a completely normal process: that one is developing an image with sponsorship for the special case that the brand has a rather negative image from the outset.

But the reasons for becoming an Olympic sponsor are varied, says sports economist Uhrich: “Access to consumers can be necessary. But another motive can certainly be that you associate yourself with the attributes that define an event like the Olympic Games and try to transfer these to the brand. Sportiness is only one thing. But there are other aspects: “We have the connection between peoples, we have happiness, we hopefully have peaceful games. We have strong emotions. These are different attributes that can also be interesting for brands.«

After all, the Olympic movement wants to stand for various values ​​that are valued in the modern world: fairness, respect or constant work on oneself. The preamble to the Olympic Charter states: “Olympism strives to create a way of life that is based on the The joy of effort, the educational value of good example, social responsibility and respect for internationally recognized human rights and universal ethical principles within the framework of the Olympic Movement.

At the same time, sponsorship revenue for the International Olympic Committee (IOC) is a billion-dollar business that is still growing. With the so-called top sponsors, who exclusively sponsor the IOC in their business area, the IOC brought in one billion US dollars for the first time in the middle of the last decade. For the current period ending with the Paris Games, there are expected to be revenues of three billion.

If the priority is financial growth, don’t you almost automatically open yourself up to criticism for not being particularly selective about the sources of money? Sebastian Uhrich recognizes a fundamental area of ​​tension: “The problem is where to draw the boundaries. A state where there are human rights violations, we may still have a consensus that this is not a good, suitable sponsor.” The sports economist believes that it is more difficult with a fast food manufacturer: “There may be people who say that it is actually appropriate not to the Olympic Games. But others might argue that they want to eat a burger while watching the Olympics.

In the world of advertising, people have long understood how to navigate this area of ​​tension. In the industry magazine “Sports Business Journal,” Arthur Solomon, manager at the PR and lobbying firm Burson, recently recommended in an essay: Sponsors should prepare and train their staff to respond to critical questions from the media, including allegations of sportswashing: “It is also It’s a good idea to have someone with extensive experience in media training on site at the Olympic Games.«

Such a PR expert should play the following role in contact with the media: “Before an interview, remind the speaker of the insights gained during the training sessions and critically monitor the interviews during the process.” That sounds like a high level of awareness that sponsorship at the Olympics can also happen quickly can seem cynical, just like sportswashing.