The IOC's 'Clean Venue' Policy 549
Dave21212 writes "Yes folks, the International Olympic Committee's 'Brand Protection Team' will be protecting against the threat of Advertising Terrorism at the games. According to an MSNBC article, the IOC's Karen Webb states 'Our role is to protect all of our sponsor categories and actively monitor ambush activity.' Restricted items include, flags, umbrellas, shirts, hats, and bags with trademarks of rival sponsors. Unofficial brands can be confiscated and with only Coke allowed on Olympic grounds, this brings new meaning to The Pepsi Challenge!"
Bottles without labels? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Bottles without labels? (Score:4, Interesting)
A few years back I used to watch professional wrestling, and there was a wrestler named Triple H. Anyway, when he came on stage, he would take a swig of water and spray it in the air. The water bottle always had its label taken off. Anyway, one time he came out with a labelled water bottle. It was in New York, and green, so I instantly recognized it as Poland Springs. However when they zoomed in on him, the bottle was blurred. I thought that was kind of funny.
I guess they didn't want to be accused of supporting one water company over another or something. But this doesn't just happen in the Olympics.
Re:Bottles without labels? (Score:5, Insightful)
From TFA: We have to protect official sponsors who have paid millions to make the Olympics happen.
Silly me. I thought it was the that made the Olympics happen.
But that's only true if you think the competition is more important than the fancy pre-shows and fireworks. I guess now it's reversed -- the competitions are ancillary, the sponsors and ads are the main event now.
Which is why I don't watch it. My wife does. But she's not as jaded as I am (yet.)
Re:Bottles without labels? (Score:5, Insightful)
Silly me. I thought it was the [athelets] that made the Olympics happen.
No, the atheletes are only there to draw in a large crowd of consumers on behalf of the advertisers.
Large crowds? (Score:5, Interesting)
I mean, really. As a more-or-less private entity, the IOC cand do whatever it wants in terms of allowing people into venues, etc. But they have turned the whole spectacle into little more than a giant advertising venue, and that has made me lose interest in the whole deal. I saw it really start to go wrong back with the flap over whether some of the original US Dream Team could wear Reebok clothes (who sponsored those athletes) or would be forced to wear Nike jumpsuits (who sponsored the Olympics). The more the IOC does this, the fewer people will be willing to turn out and attend.
Politico-Corporate Lapdogs (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Your homeland is not recognized as a country. (Score:5, Insightful)
Last I knew the flag didn't have to be a national flag.
Re:Your homeland is not recognized as a country. (Score:4, Insightful)
It's recognised enough to be allowed to compete as a separate country.
Consistency is important. If you let Taiwan compete, it shoudl be able to use its flag. If you don't recognise it as a country, don't let it compete as one.
Re:Your homeland is not recognized as a country. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Your homeland is not recognized as a country. (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/archives/2002/02/ 1 5/0000124045 [taipeitimes.com]
The above link is to an article describing incidents of Beijing officials pestering US citizens during the SLC Winter Games two years ago over display of the Taiwanese flag on private property, as well as the incident I mentioned earlier involving some friends who were detained in Atlanta for attempting to wear T-shirts bearing the Taiwanese fla
Re:Your homeland is not recognized as a country. (Score:5, Insightful)
And then she won the 400 in Sydney, and did it again. Most Australians regard her as a hero. Telling the powers that be to get stuffed is a great Australian tradition.
Re:Your homeland is not recognized as a country. (Score:5, Funny)
Disagreeing with the powers that be was what got a lot of them there in the first place.
Re:Bottles without labels? (Score:5, Interesting)
My point is I don't think the current "Olympics" is really the Olympics. I'd be happier with a much cheaper implementation. You know. Like in the old days.
Re:Bottles without labels? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Bottles without labels? (Score:4, Interesting)
Actually, it's a lot of sources beyond sponsors. The TV networks pay bigtime for it, the host government pays pleanty (and gets big economic returns), and the visitors pay bigtime as well. It's a shame that this still isn't enough and it requires sponsorship and advertisement.
Re:Bottles without labels? (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, if you think Olympic games are about the fireworks and a city getting cash to build a large infrastructure around the games that they can enjoy long after, you should love it the way it is. If you think the Olympic games are about athletic achievements, you must realize that you can run and jump very well without having to create such a show and without having to build all that brand new infrastructure.
Personally, I think that although it's very nice if the cities organizing such an event can reap such benefits, I still think that for a lack of creativity, the Olympic committee has sold its soul for money.
There have to be ways to finance the event without having to be anal about which brand of soda people walk around with, and without having to forbid athletes to blog, and without selling all exclusive media rights to a single company per country, etc. Just think how much more fun and informative the event would be for everybody if there would be blogs firectly from the athletes right after they win/lose a competition, and if more of the media except just NBC joined in the coverage.
Re:Bottles without labels? (Score:4, Insightful)
The idea that the host city gets a lot of cash and a sporting infrastructure is a common misconception. In a few weeks, it will be announced exactly how much the Greek people will lose by hosting the Games. I'm guessing they will lose the most money in history of the Olympics, even exceeding the blow Montreal took in '76.
It is not entirely their fault. Security costs exceed 1.2 billion US -- an enormous cost for a country of only 11 million to shoulder.
Salt Lake made a little cash -- but did not build anything that wasn't already planned. Atlanta built nothing that wasn't prepaid, the games were spread from DC to Florida to use existing facilities. Things like Centennial Park were funded privately, not by IOC activity.
I agree that the IOC has sold itself for money. Some of it has got to be backfiring. For instance, by only accepting Visa (R) credit cards as payment for tickets, they are excluding potential spectators and merchandise buyers who hold cards bearing other brands. If I were running these Games, I would accept any instrument of payment the paying fan had on them, in order to move merchandise and tickets that will be valueless in two weeks. I am guessing that the Athens organisers have lost more than the US$40m the IOC gained from the sponsorship fee.
Re:Bottles without labels? (Score:3, Interesting)
God knows there was no Olympics before there was capitalism.
Re:Bottles without labels? (Score:3, Interesting)
I think the poor girl handled the situation admirably and has done her country more than proud. In o
Re:Bottles without labels? (Score:3, Interesting)
I think NBC is trying to attract the American populous that doesn't normally watch the Olympics by using the everyday sports announcers that they're familiar with. I'm
Re:Bottles without labels? (Score:3, Funny)
"Ya see here, there's these two boards, here *circle* and here *circle* these guys will jump off, like this *curved lines*, and BAM!
Re:Bottles without labels? (Score:3, Funny)
And in the 2012 Olympics, they'll require that you buy the logos.
--
7 people have sent me Gmail invites. Ralph won, and will be recieving my soul. Thank you to all who played.
Hmmm
Re:Bottles without labels? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Bottles without labels? (Score:4, Insightful)
If it ever becomes a christian nation, I'll be one of the first to pick up a rifle and join the rebellion against the theocracy.
Max
Re:Bottles without labels? (Score:5, Funny)
America isn't a christian nation. There are indeed religious nutbags who desperately wish it were a christian nation, but so we've managed to keep those nutbags from seizing the government. If it ever becomes a christian nation, I'll be one of the first to pick up a rifle and join the rebellion against the theocracy.
Time to pick up that rifle then. *Cough* Bush *Cough*.
Re:Bottles without labels? (Score:3, Insightful)
So while our leader may be a religious nutcase, our country is not.
Max
Re:Bottles without labels? (Score:5, Insightful)
But he hasn't turned the U.S. into a theocracy...yet.
That may be why I'm voting for that douchebag Kerry. Not because I think he's any better than Bush (I don't), but because the democrats and republicans are so much like immature frat boys that I think the government will deadlock for four years with him in charge.
That's what I'm hoping for anyway. An ineffectual, deadlocked government. I think it's the best I can get under the current system.
Max
Re:Bottles without labels? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Bottles without labels? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:would have been funny if.... (Score:3, Interesting)
The bunch of use got sent home on a 1 day suspension 30 minutes after we arrived in homeroom. We were told not to even bother trying to come back in short
Frightening (Score:5, Interesting)
Now, fast forward 10 years and imagine that SWAT-like team practicing on the stadium, but instead of looking for actual terrorist threats, they're looking for banned advertising. Think I'm joking? Well, just accellerate current corporate greed and how much power corporations wield, and I think I'm pretty close to the truth.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Frightening (Score:3, Insightful)
Great..
Re:Frightening (Score:5, Insightful)
The organizers end up with all the loot, the competitors themselves are left out in the cold.
This a big deal in NASCAR right now, what with Coke sponsoring events and cars sponsored by Pepsi winning races and vice versa.
It's a fucking mess.
KFG
Re:Frightening (Score:4, Informative)
Personally, I have a "token" VISA card which is ONLY used when I end up at one of their "purchased" venues (accidentally), and NEVER used anywhere else.
The fact that they're proud of making these deals ("be sure to bring your VISA card because you can't use American Express"), knowing that they have paid to force me to carry extra credit cards with me, especially in these times of identity theft and credit card fraud where I'd much rather just carry one card and watch it closely, seems to me like it should be illegal.
Re:Frightening (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, now that you're bringing up silly things like that, I DO react to those anti-competitive deals too.
Costco used to be a place where I shopped regularly. I actually got a Discover card when THAT was all they would accept. When they changed to American Express and quit takiing Discover, I cancelled the Discover card and stopped shopping at Costco.
Same with Shell Oil. I've been a customer since 1967, and had one
Re:Frightening (Score:5, Interesting)
That, combined with all of the corruption (remember the fall out from Utah and Japan not too long ago), and the flat-out censorship of participants (athletes are not able to keep blogs, and somewhere I think they were restricted from writing their personal experiences even after the games, if the IOC doesn't get its cut), not to mention the many other layers of crap reported earlier here on
I stopped watching, paying attention, or even caring about the Olympics after I saw what they did in Atlanta.
Judging by the dismal ticket sales, perhaps this is a growing trend.
Re:Name game (Score:3, Interesting)
Protest by going naked! (Score:3, Funny)
> example, and Nike is a sponsor and Adidas is not,
> they will confiscate it. Frankly, I would flat out refuse.
Don't! Just give them the rest of your clothes too. If you are not allowed to wear clothes made by Adidas, why should you be allowed to wear clothes you got at the Old Navy, or Target, or Salvation Army? Those companies probably did not contribute to the Olympics either. The only safe way is going in your birthday suit, which is the only thi
Re:Frightening (Score:5, Insightful)
An even better example of where our culture is going is the fact that you think it's perfectly reasonable to pay money to wear clothing which has the very dominant feature of being an advertising device for the company making that clothing. So you've chosen to be a voluntary addidas billboard rather than a nike billboard, and you're upset that consumerism dominates our society to the extent that events, like clothes, are mere advertising opportunities, and as such are controlled by the advertisers?
Re:Frightening (Score:5, Insightful)
Are you serious?
If this isn't a troll, then you've lost touch a bit. The Olympics are supposed to be about international athletic competetion. Not million-dollar stage shows with fireworks and robotic Greek gods flying around. None of that adds to the real spectacle, IMHO, and none of the games requires expensive equipment or locales.
The article said Coke spent $60M, VISA another $30M, something like $120M from just the major sponsors.
You could have a perfectly excellent Olympics for a tenth or less of that. An acceptable Olympics (to most) for under a million.
The athletes want to compete, not be whores for some commercial concern (at least until after they win.)
Re:Frightening (Score:5, Insightful)
The article said Coke spent $60M, VISA another $30M, something like $120M from just the major sponsors.
You could have a perfectly excellent Olympics for a tenth or less of that. An acceptable Olympics (to most) for under a million.
Are you kidding? [msn.com]
Contrary to your statement, many Olympic events do require expensive locales. See, there are rules here, and rules are what make sports what they are - without them, a sport is just a couple of guys hitting a ball back and forth. You can't just swim in any swimming pool, you can't play soccer in a baseball stadium, you can't have a rowing competition in the middle of the ocean. These things all have to be regulation size and with regulated conditions, not to mention enough seats to ensure that people who want to can actually watch.
You couldn't build an Olympic-regulation swimming pool for less than $1 million. Even if you only held the Olympics in cities that had held them before (which sort of defeats the purpose of having them), the cost of refurbishing and modernizing old Olympic facilities alone would easily top $1 million. And that's just the first thing you'd have to do.
Hell, it cost more than $1 million just to put a track around the football field at my old high school. And that was in the 1980's!
Billions are being spent this time on security. And don't tell me it's not needed or that it's all paranoia, because you know, it's not like terrorism at the Olympics has never happened before [about.com], right? If you can't protect the athletes, then it's not even worth having an Olympics. It's just sports - it's not worth risking your life over. So this is a required expense if you ask me, and it's not really the reason for the high cost of the games anyway - Sydney 2000 cost $5.9 billion.
So your cost analysis is a little off. The Olympics could be done for less than the Athens games depending on the city, sure, but not much less in this day and age. The logistics, the facilities required, the security, hell the simple cost of salaried staff would be in the multiple millions of dollars at least. I don't see how you could do an Olympics in this day and age for less than several billion dollars.
Anyway, I don't have any problem at all with Olympic officials forcing athletes to hide corporate logos. How many sports have we seen where athletes have basically turned into walking advertisements? In some sports they seem to be actively hawking their sponsors during games (cough NBA basketball cough). And I have seen some seriously questionable "viral" marketing at these games... for example, just yesterday at the diving competition, the American divers were repeatedly shown listening to music during rest periods, with the NBC analysts commenting on their playlists. So today, I hit the NBC Olympics web site, and sure enough, there's a link asking "What music does Laura Wilkinson train to?" on the right side of the page, which goes to a page of huge Real Rhapsody ads. That kind of sneaky stuff really pisses me off.
Re:Frightening (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Frightening (Score:4, Insightful)
The Olympics have not been going since Ancient Greek times.
There were the ancient Olympics, which stopped several thousand years ago.
Now we have the modern Olympics, started just over 100 years ago. Two different competitions with different organisations and different sets of ideals.
Re:Frightening (Score:3, Informative)
WTF? You never heard of Economies of Scale?
Anyone else switching off in the UK? (Score:5, Interesting)
The funny thing is, that previous stories posted here about China's restrictions, firewalling off any sites promoting freedom of speech etc have evoked harsh criticism of the regime. This is no different though, except the control isn't in the hands of a political party, but a few greedy corporations.
I can't believe that after charging people to come and watch the games, they're now telling them what to eat, drink, wear and think while there. I'd ask for my money back; no actually I'd ask for payment for them employing me as some fucking walking advert.
No wonder attendance is only just hovering above 50% this year, even though it's in Athens. Seems like people don't like "controlled fun"... Funny that...
Re:Anyone else switching off in the UK? (Score:5, Interesting)
The costs of putting on the Olympics have increased so much that only the largest cities can afford to host them then only with massive corporate sponsorship. Disgusting and sad.
It isn't corporation's fault (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It isn't corporation's fault (Score:3, Insightful)
Last I checked, corporations were run by human beings. (Isn't that always the trope rolled out to counter attacks on "corporatism"?). And humans have this amazing thing called "a mind" that allows them to -- believe it or not -- choose. Specifically, they can choose not to follow the siren call of their "prgrammed DNA"; they actually be ethical.
I certainly do blame corporations for
Hear hear! (Score:4, Insightful)
Did they -have- to offer the current Gestapo-esque logo placement to Coke? No! They could have said "Piss off, its a free country and the athletes can have Pepsi on the field if they want."
That they did not do that should tell you a great deal about the IOC and the people who run it. In fact they probably suggested it to Coke, not the other way around.
Coke is an American company. Does Coke really want to be associated with police state tactics, particularly at the Olympics? I think not.
As far as the IOC is concerned the athletes have no rights. They exist for the sole purpose of enriching the IOC and its contituent gratuity seeking, slime mold apparatchiks. These people don't walk, they glide on an extruded layer of mucous.
What political system is that kind of thing most closely identified with? Give you a hint, it starts with an "S", ends with "ocialism".
I bet the North Korean and Chinese teams feel right at home.
Re:Anyone else switching off in the UK? (Score:3, Insightful)
If this is enough reason to convince you not to watch the Olympics, you clearly had little desire to watch in the first place. These are the best athletes of today, and being an athlete myself, I don't see how you could not watch them compete.
>No wonder attendance is only just hovering above 50% this year, even though it's in Athens. Seems like people don't like "controlled fun"... Funny that...
You're out
So much for freedom, sports, and everything nice (Score:2)
But what about the spectators? (Score:2, Interesting)
If the latter, could someone loosen my tin foil a bit?
Re:But what about the spectators? (Score:5, Interesting)
So the alternative to "advertising terrorism" is (Score:4, Interesting)
To their credit, they are hardly the first governing body to respond to the spectre of terrorism with a crackdown on civil liberties
Re:So the alternative to "advertising terrorism" i (Score:4, Funny)
Rats (Score:5, Funny)
Ok, its way out of hand now.. (Score:5, Interesting)
First they spend 1.5 Billion to invasively spy on EVERYONE there...
Then athletes cant talk about the games, or take pictures.. For fear of not getting their take of the revenue..
Now fans cant even choose what food they eat, unless its a 'sponsored' product?
The entire Olympic games have become a commercialized farce, and needs to be disbanded.
Its a mockery of what it should be about: athletes competing for the title of 'best'. Nothing more, nothing less.
Re:Ok, its way out of hand now.. (Score:2)
Re:Ok, its way out of hand now.. (Score:3, Insightful)
I can no longer watch the Olympics like I used to.
I want the old, pre-sell-out Olyompics back, thanks.
Re:Ok, its way out of hand now.. (Score:3, Insightful)
But I suppose as long as people like you who are happy with the current state of affairs are in the majority, then to heck with anyone who disagrees.
You know -- the tyranny of the majority. Or in this case, the Tyranny of Marketing, is so nice. Dontcha think?
Athletes boycot the olympics (Score:3, Informative)
Not that big of a deal... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Not that big of a deal... (Score:3, Interesting)
this is stupid (Score:2, Insightful)
plz i mean "Advertising Terrorism"???....total horseshit...
The Olympic Charter (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The Olympic Charter (Score:5, Insightful)
According to the Olympic Charter, established by Pierre de Coubertin, the goal of the Olympic Movement is to contribute to building a peaceful and better world by educating youth through sport practised without discrimination of any kind and in the Olympic spirit, which requires mutual understanding with a spirit of friendship, solidarity and fair play.
According to the Olympic Charter (rev 1), established by Major Sponsors, the goal of the Olympic Movement is to contribute to corporate profits peaceful and better brand recognition by advertising to youth through sport practised without competitors images of any kind and in the Olympic spirit, which requires major contributions with a spirit of exclusivity, frequent advertisments and no fair use.
Re:The Olympic Charter (Score:4, Funny)
Yeah, unless you're wearing a Pepsi shirt...
I, for one, welcome our new corporate overlords. No, wait... no i don't.
Going to Olympics is like riding with Hitler! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Going to Olympics is like riding with Hitler! (Score:5, Informative)
The IOC is not democratic nor accountable to anyone, and have always operated in a totally autocratic manner.
(An a less important but symbolic aside: The torch-carrying tradition was invented by Nazi Germany, who used the games held in Germany 1936 as a huge propaganda event.)
The games have also been connected to commercial interest since the start. For example, the games in 1900 and 1904 were both side-by-side with large trade fairs.
Re:Going to Olympics is like riding with Hitler! (Score:4, Insightful)
It's not just Samaranch that's the problem. A lot of the members of the IOC are from countries where totalitarian decision making is the norm, so it's not surprising that the Olympics takes on a totalitarian flavor.
Add that in with corporate interests who think that fascist laws that enforce their monopolies are a good thing, and IOC members who think about graft first, sports last, and you get a pretty scary/accurate portrait of the world we live in now.
Re:Going to Olympics is like riding with Hitler! (Score:5, Informative)
My Rights Online (Score:5, Insightful)
Judgement, anyone!?!? (Score:2, Insightful)
Is there a new game in town? (Score:2)
What I'm thinking is, now that there's a world class venue in athens, start a new sanctioning body and a better run set of games that happen in g
Illegal usage of Olympic trademark (Score:5, Funny)
I draw your attention to the inappropriate use of the words "Olympic" and "Pepsi" in the same article. Please remove this document immediately or you will be hearing from our lawyers.
Jacques
My Fear (Score:5, Interesting)
Cant attend a sporting event with the same rules even going as far as saying you cant wear a hockey jersey to football game.
How long will it be until a corporation begins to fund roads or parks and have security banning other advertisers.
It's bad enough I cant watch the superior coverage of the olympics legaly here in the USA due to similar contracts. Though I wonder how the advertisers would feel if people began to boycot them becuase one tv station banned them from consumer choice of BBC's olympics vs MicroSoft NBC Olympics.
Re:My Fear (Score:3, Insightful)
There are two types of border in this world: political and corporate. The two are becoming ever closer to one.
Within our generation I anticipate that your legal rights and responsibilities will be defined by the Venn intersection of the corporate influences in your physical location.
Coca-Cola will own the territory of Vancouver, for instance. City council will be paid to pass law that makes possession of Pepsi illegal. You will not be able to purchase nor import
You need to work on your Googleskills, grasshopper (Score:3, Informative)
Athens 2004 Restricted Items and Actions (Score:5, Informative)
"Advertisers try vaulting over the official games marketers"
http://www.nypost.com/business/18669.htm [nypost.com] In 1996, Nike was the Cinderella of the Atlanta Olympics. Not invited to the ball, it made sure the shoe fit anyway.
The sneaker maker handed out swoosh-branded "Just Do It" signs, erected billboards and even built a makeshift sports complex -- leaving the patriotic impression that it was an official Olympic sponsor.
It wasn't. Archrival Reebok shelled out millions for bona fide sponsorship status. Nike glommed onto Olympic glory in a money-saving ploy known as ambush marketing.
"For pennies on the dollar, relative to the top sponsors, ambush marketing can be cost effective," said sports marketing expert David Carter. "Many consumers end up rather confused as to who the official Olympic sponsors are."
For what it's worth, from http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?Art Num=61113 [libertypost.org]:
Known as the "clean venue policy", the rules were drawn up by the Greeks and the International Olympic Committee (IOC) to shield sponsors from so-called "ambush marketing" -- an attempt to advertise items during the games without paying sponsorship fees.
The restrictions on food and drink are intended to ensure that only items made by official sponsors such as McDonald's and two Greek dairy firms are consumed at Olympic venues.
An official familiar with the restrictions said: "We have to protect official sponsors who have paid millions to make the Olympics happen. There will be cases of individual spectators being allowed in wearing a T-shirt bearing the logo of a rival sports brand but anyone who tries to practise ambush marketing will be removed."
And the actual list:
http://www.athens2004.com/en/specAdviceRestricted [athens2004.com]
The following items and actions are restricted at Olympic Venues:
Mopeds, bicycles, skates, skateboards
Electronic equipment of Non-Rights holding Broadcasting Organisations
Flags of non-participating countries. Flags of participating countries larger than 2x1 meters, banners (larger than 1x1 meters approximately). No banner may be hung in metallic, wooden or plastic poles or frames
Horns, laser devices and other devices that cause disturbance
Flag poles, logos, open umbrellas in seating areas, items (T-shirts, hats, bags, etc.) with distinctive trademarks of companies that are competitive to those of the sponsors
Pirate "Athens 2004" products
Leaflets, pamphlets, non-approved publications, unauthorised signs and labels, printed material for publishing purposes with religious, political, provocative or obscene content
Balls, rackets, Frisbees, and similar items, a large number of coins, lighters
Musical instruments, glass bottles, flasks, iceboxes, ice-bags, thermos, water, beverages, alcoholic drinks and material, in general, of any shape or content, or any other items that ATHOC in cooperation with the Security Authorities in charge, consider to be dangerous or inappropriate
Food (except for proven medical reasons)
Animals (except service animals)
Large items, large bags, suitcases, folding seats, small stools etc. (except in certain events)
Strollers in seating areas
Smoking or gambling
Collection of money for unauthorised purposes
Use or distribution of clothing and/or any type of material with the intent of advertising, promotion, raising money or making profit through unauthorised means
Ambush marketing
Demonstrations of a political or religious nature
Unauthorised ticket sales
Unauthorised sale of food
Unauthorised entry of TV presenters and unauthorised transmission and/or videotaping through transmi
Re:Athens 2004 Restricted Items and Actions (Score:4, Funny)
Well there you go. And they spent like, what, a billion dollars on security? And for what? There was a rule against bringing in things terrorists would use all along. Sounds like conspiracy!
Re:Athens 2004 Restricted Items and Actions (Score:3, Insightful)
iceboxes, ice-bags, thermos, water, beverages
a large number of coins
1: Make visitors sit in 30-degree-plus temperatures for hours on end.
2: Force them to buy overpriced official Olympic-brand bottled water or equally overpriced Coke.
3: Confiscate their change.
4: Profit!!!
Re:Athens 2004 Restricted Items and Actions (Score:3, Insightful)
ROTFL. So whilst the worlds top atheletes in the peak of human fitness compete, the audience is forced to eat McDonalds? Oh the irony...
Phillip.
Understated Point Missing (Score:5, Insightful)
While worrying about "brand impurity" cutting to the "heart" of "commercial viability," they seem to have forgotten about the soul of the games.
Which is understandable, since to the promoters and "marketing protection squads," the games ceased long ago to be anything other than a way to make lots of profits.
When it becomes so bad that the majority of participants and spectators don't want to play a role in these little marketing games, it'll be too late. And that day is getting closer.
Fully justified (Score:3, Insightful)
Nike's ambush of the 1996 Atlanta Olympics is still seen as the ambush of all ambushes. Saving the US$ 50 million that an official sponsorship would have cost, Nike plastered the city in billboards, handed out swoosh banners to wave at the competitions and erected an enormous Nike center overlooking the stadium. The tactics devastated the International Olympic Committee's credibility and spooked other organizations such as FIFA into adopting more assertive anti-ambushing strategies.
The article goes on to mention how Nike has never sponsored an entire event, and admits to "coming from a different angle" by sponsoring teams, press conferences even individual players. It's too bad that it has nothing specific to say about the Pepsi/Coca-Cola relationship.
correction to article (Score:5, Interesting)
2000: Qantas Airlines' slogan "Spirit of Australia" coincidentally sounds like games slogan "Share the spirit" to chagrin of official sponsor Ansett Air
Anyone who has lived in Australia can tell you that Qantas has used "Spirit of Australia" as an advertising slogan for at least 20 years or more. Not only that, but Qantas is one of those "grand old lady" organisations who don't stoop to any type of advertising/marketing "tricks". The reporter has actually made a mistake with this choice of example, because if anything, it would be Ansett with the wrongdoing here.
Like an amusement park... (Score:4, Insightful)
What it boils down to is the fact that the Olympics have lost their glow as a world gathering and now are just plain one big international TV game show production...
Re:Like an amusement park... (Score:4, Insightful)
What about some google-bombing ... (Score:5, Funny)
Not that I drink a lot of any CSD, but
CC.
Olympics "mon deriere" (Score:3, Interesting)
Restriction madness - from the POV of a Greek (Score:5, Interesting)
Friends of mine who work at Olympic-related services are not allowed to bring to work a bag of food that has the name of a rival company of McDonalds. They are instructed by security officers to use simple white bags without these logos!
People who go at the games are not allowed to bring cell phones or coins with them, for the sake of "safety". Also they are not allowed to wear something that bears a trademark of a company that is a competitor to the official sponsors.
All the non-olympic-sponsors ads at the Metro have been taken off. Similarly for ads on important roads and avenues, especially the ones where there are venues such as the Marathon and the street cycling.
Yes, it's crazy alright, together with the whole story about the linking policy to the Athens 2004 Web site which was mentioned in a previous story, which reminded me of something that happened sometime a year ago. Some kids in an hi-school made a web site about the Olympics. Their mistake? They used the official "Athens 2004(TM)" logo, which the Organizing Committee had said that they will "defend" it at all costs. Well, they took those kids' web site down, because of unauthorized trademark use.
"Olympic Spirit...
However, let me add that the atmosphere here in Athens is FWIW pretty damn good. Even though most of the people are on vacation, as it happens in every August in this city, (and because of that the traffic is very light and it takes me 15' - 20' to get to work instead of the ususal 30'-45'), the happenings in every corner of the city, the visitors of every nation and culture, and the games themselves give the city a very nice atmosphere. Together with all the road works and all that have finally finished, it feels like a much better and humane city... even though we are going to pay for it for a lot of years to come...
Advertising Terrorism? Not found in articles! (Score:5, Informative)
Methinks paragon_au just put that in there to get a rise out of knee-jerk, I didn't RTFA slashdotters. No one "official" ever used the term Advertising Terrorism.
when at the Olympics, don't forget your stupidity (Score:5, Insightful)
When Seattle was looking into the Olympics it became know that many business would be "forced" to give up their name due to the use of Olympic. We've got a fucking Olympic Mountain Range these are named after. But no less, they would be forced to change, by local and state gov't edict.
We never got far enough along to determine if the mountain range would have to be renamed, perhaps they would just blot it out when doing panarama's of Seattle, sounds like it would be considered a terrorist mountainrange.
I supect a few well placed bribes could have mitigated the situation, perhaps a few IOC kids could get free rides to the UW.
perhaps it's time for the olympics to die again for a thousand or so years.
Oh, the irony... (Score:3, Funny)
"Hey, keep your damn ads off the web."
"Damn corporations are everywhere. Get the hell out of here, kill them all."
"What right do corporations have to commercial speech?"
---------------------
For one day only on
"Hey, what right does the IOC have infringing the rights of coroprations to freely advertise?"
Am I the only one who sees the irony here?
the truly rebellious among us (Score:3, Interesting)
Ah... (Score:3, Funny)
Some "advertising terrorism" still gets through (Score:3, Informative)
BBC article link [bbc.co.uk].
The IOC is a dinosaur. (Score:3, Insightful)
I remember, in the roll-up to the '96 games in Atlanta (where I used to live), the local OC started going after companies that had the word "olympic" in the name. The best one was a car garage that had been around for decades - I forget the entire name but the main word in the garage's name was "Olympic". Absolutely nothing to do with sports - it was a repair shop! - but they were jacked over and (IIRC) forced to change the name they'd done business under for years - about as long as the head of the local OC had been *alive*.
Yaaaaaaaayyyy, CAPITALISM!
Who the fuck are they targeting? (Score:5, Insightful)
However, it's a bigger problem that monoliths can actually look at dropping millions for product placement as a good investment.
Stories like this make me feel like I'm living in a fucking loony box, and the inmates have taken over - who the fuck really eats at MCD's because of this "I'm lovin it" shit? Who the hell really felt a little tingle up their spine when they saw the "our best is serving the world's best" ads? If you raised your hand, please, shoot yourself.
The most amazing thing about advertising is that it actually works. I didn't buy an ipod because 50 Cent had one in one of his shitty videos. I bought an ipod because of the word of mouth endorsements from *gasp* private individuals.
Likewise, I'd like to know how many people are really going to buy Nike, now that they are the "official" sponsors. It's not like the horde of 10 year olds that wanted Air Jordans because MJ had em. I, for one, couldn't give a flying fuck what Michelle Kwan wears. It's not that "consumers are confused" as to who the Olympic bribe...er..."sponsors" are, it's that they simply don't give a shit.
In the end, the joke is on the corporations - at least, on the apparel side of things. I couldn't care less about athletes, but I can at least name the more prominent ones. I know who Kobe Bryant is, I know who A-Rod is, I know who Michael Vick is. I would suggest that the average person, the type of mindless fuck who would buy something based on what he/she saw on TV, can't name 10 Olympians. I can name Nancy Kerrigan and Tonya Harding for all the wrong reasons. I can name Michelle Kwan because she was the Asian eye candy of choice elevated by the powers-that-be. I can name Kurt Angle because of his WWE deal.
Now, here's an even bigger challenge for the average person - name 10 Olympians involved with THIS Olympiad. The average person can't. That kind of hurts MJ-style endorsement deals, based upon the will to emulate the athlete, when you don't even know who the fuck the athlete is!
Still, it's disgusting to know that even one person has changed their preference from Burger King to MCD's, based upon the Olympic marketing. It's sad that someone, somewhere, will go out of their way to buy Coke instead of Pepsi, because "that's what the Olympic people drink!"
It's all around us - the Nvidia/ATI scams. The Coke "real" commercials that imply you'll get teased by a hot beachcomber chick if you only drink their carbonated voodoo potions. The entirety of the fucking Superbowl. It's getting to a point where there is no more "product," only advertising. It's already gotten to a point where they are actually advertising for advertising! Don't buy it? Think of this - MTV's business model is based upon advertising both products and new "stars," who then advertise new "products" to make the majority of their livelyhood. MTV advertises Britney Spears, Britney advertises Pepsi, Pepsi advertises their tie-in deal-of-the-week; it's a never ending cycle of madness, and it's baffling how anyone ever makes any money!
I am sick of this.... (Score:3, Insightful)
In NASCAR, the drivers hare knocking down and blocking bottles set on top of the car that belong to the race sponser because one of their associate sponsers is Coke. Knocking down Tropicana bottles and etc. Their car's are emblazoned with logos and sometimes they get special paint schemes for one race deals and the like. NASCAR itself has a official hotel, a official drink, a official fuel and I am sure a official water. When does it stop?
Clean venues should be against the law as they restrict freedom. Freedom to wear whatever logo you'd like. To bring in a pepsi if you don't like coke. To let the athelete's drink whatever drink they want. The Olympics used to be one of the few events we have now where the athlete's did not care about what water they were drinking or whatever. I think one thing I would like right now is a list of these sponsers so I know who's stuff not to drink for this infraction on anyone's freedoms. Maybe this policy may be why the olympic venue's are not selling out.
Itg is even bad at the local levels now....where I work, when I started 10 years ago, they had pepsi AND coke in the cafeteria. Now, their's only pepsi on campus. Pepsi is our official drink. Well piss on that...I bring in what I want...water or tea.