Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Low-Carb Studies & Research / Media Watch > LC Research/Media
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   ^
Old Wed, Jul-11-12, 01:23
Demi's Avatar
Demi Demi is offline
Posts: 21,957
 
Plan: LCHF/IF
Stats: 217/192/160 Female 5'10"
BF:
Progress: 44%
Location: UK
Default UK: Ban junk food sponsors from Olympic sports says Cardiologist

Quote:
BBC News Online
London, UK
9 July, 2012

Viewpoint: Ban junk food sponsors from Olympic sports

By Dr Aseem Malhotra
Cardiologist, London


On a recent visit to Newham, home of London's Olympic village, I was shocked to learn that in the past 10 years the incidence of diabetes there has more than doubled.

Dr Chandra Gowda, a local GP, told me that nowadays 40%-50% of all consultations in his practice are either a new diagnosis of diabetes or its complications, such as heart disease, stroke, and kidney failure.

He believes this surge is directly related to the diet of the local population:

"There is overproliferation of fast food restaurants in the area and it's almost every second shop," he said.

The scale of obesity and diet-related disease around the world is alarming. According to the United Nations, diet-related diseases such heart disease, diabetes and cancer pose the greatest global threat to our health; contributing to a staggering 35 million deaths per year, dwarfing the six to eight million smoking-related deaths each year.

Six out of 10 UK adults are classed as being overweight or obese
In Britain, one in three children are either overweight or obese by the age of nine, with six out of 10 adults in the same category.

Without effective intervention this figure could affect 90% of the UK population by 2050 and cost the NHS and the tax payer 45bn a year.

Unless we get a grip of this public health emergency I believe it will cripple the NHS as we know it.

So what is the biggest culprit?

More and more evidence is emerging that it is sugars, more specifically High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS), which is added to almost all processed food.

'Slow killer'

Earlier this year, paediatric endocrinologist Dr Robert Lustig published a paper in Nature stating that sugar consumption has trebled worldwide in the past 50 years and is so damaging to our health that it should be regulated like alcohol.

According to obesity researcher and author Zoe Harcombe sugar is the only substance that humans regularly ingest that has no nutritional value whatsoever:

"[It has] no essential fats, no proteins, no vitamins, no minerals. It is unique in that respect," she says.

A little is not a problem, but a lot kills, slowly. And since it is added to nearly all processed food, it is extremely difficult to avoid.

We should all be concerned about the processed food that we are eating as 40% of those who develop the metabolic syndrome of diabetes, high blood pressure and fatty liver disease will be of normal weight.

'Wrong message'

As a cardiologist I treat heart disease on a daily basis. At the Royal Free Hospital in London we have one of the fastest treatment times for heart attacks in the UK.

The NHS has made tremendous improvements in providing this type of care to the majority of the population 24-hours-a-day; that is if you are lucky enough to make it to hospital alive - approximately 40% of heart attack patients do not.

But, having seen the unspeakable suffering caused by diet-related diseases, I would much rather these patients did not develop them in the first place.

Of course the Olympic sponsors cannot be held accountable for Britain's poor health, but their connection with the Games sends a dreadful message.

In the context of an obesity epidemic I find it obscene that the Olympics chooses to associate itself with fast food, sugary drinks, chocolate and alcohol.

Labour shadow minister for public health Diane Abbott, whose constituency is in East London close to the Olympic village, is equally scathing:

"I think it's quite shocking that McDonald's, Coca-Cola, Cadbury's, and Heineken are the main food sponsors," she says.

"These are products which are all very well as a treat, but what Olympic sponsorship allows them to do is promote their brand and insinuate themselves into people's daily diet."

Impact on children

I also believe it is wrong for sporting role models to endorse junk food such as sugary drinks, chocolate and crisps. Of particular concern is the negative impact this has on our children.

The largest McDonald's in the world has been built at the Olympic park
And it is naive and ignorant of sports men and women to blame obesity on lack of physical activity.

I encourage the health benefits of regular exercise, but this is not the solution in tackling obesity. One would have to run for five hours to burn the calories of consuming a chocolate bar, a packet of crisps and a burger and chips washed down with a fizzy drink.

When I spoke to former British Olympic swimming gold medallist Duncan Goodhew about the issue he told me that when he was training for the Moscow Olympics in 1980 he avoided all processed foods and was aware even back then that sugary surges were bad for the body and would impair his performance.

It is time for regulation that has an impact.

A ban on firms such as McDonald's and Coca-Cola from sponsoring major sporting events and the prohibition on the use of celebrities to sell unhealthy food and drink to children would be a good start.

There is an opportunity for Britain to take the lead by leaving a positive health legacy from the Olympics.

We do not want the Games to be remembered for being associated with the opening of the largest McDonald's in the world, which has been constructed inside the Olympic park.


Watch Dr Aseem Malhotra's Newsnight's report on the obesity and the Olympics on Monday 9 July 2012 at 22:30 BST on BBC Two, then afterwards on the BBC iPlayer and Newsnight website.



Newsnight put the views expressed Dr Malhotra's report to the International Olympics Committee, the London Organising Committee and a number of key sponsors. Here are the statements they issued in response:

Statement from the International Olympics Committee (IOC):

"The IOC only enters into partnerships with organisations that it believes work in accordance with the values of the Olympic Movement. Before entering or extending any partnership, we have a duty on behalf of all of the stakeholders in the Olympic Movement to consider this partnership very carefully, particularly where we enter partnerships on a long term basis. We are proud to work with both Coca-Cola and McDonald's, with whom we have long term agreements in place through 2020.

"Coca-Cola has been a partner of the Olympic Games since 1928, and has an outstanding heritage in supporting the Olympic Movement, and promoting the Olympic Games and active, healthy lifestyles to billions of consumers. Today, Coca-Cola sponsors more than 250 physical activity and nutrition education programs in more than 100 countries and is committed to sponsoring a program in every country where it operates by the end of 2015.

"For London 2012, the company is focused on using its partnership with the Olympic Games to amplify the importance of active, healthy living. In London, Coca-Cola will deliver a variety and choice, and provide easy-to-understand information about their products so consumers can decide what is most appropriate for them. In fact, they will offer the widest range of drinks they have ever offered at an Olympic Games, including sparkling and still, low- and no-calorie choices, juices, smoothies and water.

McDonald's has supported the Olympic Movement as a sponsor since 1976, and earlier this year we signed an extension to our global partnership with them through to 2020. McDonald's provides a varied menu with a wide choice of high-quality options in its restaurants at the Olympic Games. The company is committed to promoting an active lifestyle, and has implemented well publicised nutrition and active lifestyle programmes around the world. For example, through its Champions of Play programme, McDonald's will bring nearly 200 young people from more than 33 countries to London for a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.

"McDonald's also launched the 'Happy Meal Mascotathon' in the UK, with unique Happy Meal activity toys to track energy use. McDonald's will offer their most extensive menu at an Olympic Games in their Olympic venue restaurants, and for the first time, will serve Happy Meals which will include fruit, vegetable and dairy options.

"The companies also support many other sporting organisations and events, ranging from major international events to local grassroots sports programmes - including for example, (Coca-Cola) The Fifa World Cup, the NFL, the Rugby World Cup and (McDonald's) The Fifa World Cup, The Football Association.

"Funding from the Worldwide TOP Programme goes directly to over 200 National Olympic Committees, as well as to the Organising Committees of the Olympic Games. Without sponsorship funding, the Olympic Games would not happen in its current format and athletes from a number of nations would simply not be able to compete.

"By showcasing the inspirational sporting achievements of top athletes at the Games, we are able to promote and reinforce the importance of sports as part of a healthy, active lifestyle around the globe. Commercial partnerships play a major role in funding and promoting the Olympic Games, and physical activity initiatives and programmes.

"By supporting the Olympic Games, our Worldwide Partners promote sport and exercise, not only by supporting the Olympians who are able to train and compete at the Games thanks to the funding they receive, but also among the general public, who can draw inspiration from the performances of these athletes. Our sponsors are dedicated to using their marketing expertise and the appeal of their brands to communicate about physical activity in a relevant way.

"We are proud to be working with all of our Worldwide TOP Partners to deliver a successful Olympic Games that will bring with them a wealth of sporting, economic and social benefits."

Statement from London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games (Locog):

"Sponsors provide a huge amount of the funding required to stage the Games - without our sponsors, the Games simply wouldn't happen. We have a fantastic group of world class sponsors on board, working with us to stage spectacular Games this summer.

"They also have some great activation programmes which are helping deliver the vision behind London 2012, to use the Games to achieve lasting change.

"There will be sponsor-branded restaurants and products in the Olympic Park. This will be alongside a diverse and full-range of other local food offerings which we are committed to providing. We will cater for the wide range of people attending the Games, from athletes to spectators."

Statement from Coca-Cola:

"As one of the longest, continuous sponsors of the Olympic Movement, we are proud that we are able to use our sponsorship to enable millions of people to experience the Games and believe we have a valid role to play. As well as sharing expertise, without the support of sponsors such as Coca-Cola, many National Olympic Committees would be unable to send athletes to compete.

"People consume many different foods and beverages, so no one single food or beverage alone is responsible for people being overweight or obese. We believe all of our drinks can be enjoyed as part of an active, healthy lifestyle that includes a sensible, balanced diet and regular physical activity.

"We have continually innovated our beverage choices - from one product in one size offered at the 1948 Olympic Games to today more than 500 brands with over 800 low- and no-calorie beverages. At London 2012 we will provide the widest range of drinks and sizes ever offered at an Olympic or Paralympic Games, to suit every lifestyle and hydration need.

"We are also helping people be physically active and our three-year partnership with StreetGames will connect 110,000 young people with sport and create a new generation of coaches. Coca-Cola sponsors more than 250 physical activity and nutrition education programmes in more than 100 countries and we are committed to sponsoring a programme in every country that we operate in by the end of 2015."

Statement from McDonald's:

"Sponsorship is essential to the successful staging of the Olympics and Paralympics. The Games is the biggest catering operation in the world and there aren't many businesses that can rise to this challenge and do so in any country that the Olympics choose to visit. As a London 2012 sponsor, we are using our catering and customer service expertise to provide high quality British food quickly and safely, as well as our experience in people development to help train the 70,000 volunteers needed for the Games in our role as the Presenting Partner for the Games Maker programme.

"We recognise that public health issues like obesity are complex matters that cannot be solved by governments or companies alone. Ultimately it's up to individuals to make the right food, drink, and activity choices for themselves and our broad range of menu options in a variety of sizes, together with the nutrition information, means that customers can make more informed choices.

"At London 2012 we will be serving our broadest ever menu at any Olympics - alongside our traditional options such as burgers and fries, we have many other options such as porridge, wraps, salads and fruit bags. We have also invested in a programme of recipe reformulation to deliver real benefits to our customers, for example reducing the salt in the Chicken McNuggets by 30% and reducing salt in our fries by a quarter. Our average children's meal sold in 2011 contained 31% less sugar compared to 2011 and 46% less salt than it did in 2000.

"We're committed to using our involvement in London 2012 to contribute to leaving a lasting legacy after the Games, whether that's by innovating to make our Olympic Park restaurants the most sustainable in the world, helping to train the 70,000 volunteers, or creating a nationally-recognised qualification for the volunteers that we'll hand over to the hospitality sector after the Games to help drive up customer service standards across our sector."

Statement from Cadbury:

"The sale of confectionery and ice cream is long established at Olympic and Paralympic Games' venues along with many other snacks and treats. It is therefore entirely appropriate for those treats to be made by Cadbury as the Games come to Britain and we are very proud to give our support to London 2012."

Statement from Heineken:

"Heineken is proud to be a supplier and partner to the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games.

"As an industry leader and a global business, Heineken is unequivocally committed to the responsible marketing of its beers and ciders. We have a long track record of harnessing the power of global sporting events such as the Uefa Champions League and the Rugby World Cup to increase consumer awareness of both the Heineken brand and the responsible consumption of alcohol.

"Heineken actively encourages the enjoyment of beer in moderation as part of a healthy balanced lifestyle at all times."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-18708790
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Wed, Jul-11-12, 02:25
Demi's Avatar
Demi Demi is offline
Posts: 21,957
 
Plan: LCHF/IF
Stats: 217/192/160 Female 5'10"
BF:
Progress: 44%
Location: UK
Default

Quote:
From BBC News Online
London, UK
11 July, 2012

London 2012: 'Break fast food link with Olympics' says medical chief

The sponsorship of big sports events such as the Olympics by fast food and alcohol brands has been questioned by Wales' chief medical officer.

Dr Tony Jewell said he wanted to "break the links" between sports and fast food, fizzy drinks and alcohol.

"Top athletes do not succeed by consuming burgers, chips and cola, or binge drinking," he said.

Dr Jewell made the remarks in his final annual report published ahead of his planned resignation over the summer.

And a ban on super-sized soft drinks proposed by the Mayor of New York was worth considering in Wales, he added.

In the run up to the Olympics, he said more than half the population of Wales are overweight, or obese, and a third do no or very little physical activity.

The diet and lifestyle causes of largely avoidable conditions such as type two diabetes and high blood pressure had to be addressed, he said.

"As McDonald's prepare to open its largest restaurant in the world in the heart of the Olympic Park and sponsors Coca-Cola ramp up their advertising campaigns, I want us to consider the links between sports events, brands that promote fast food and drink, and our eating habits," he said.

He highlighted the caswe of tobacco advertising which was now unthinkable at sporting events.

"Whilst the powers to ban fast food advertising are not devolved to Wales I believe we need to break the links between sporting achievement, alcohol, fizzy soft drinks and fast foods," he added.

"Top athletes do not succeed by consuming burgers, chips and cola, or binge drinking.

"Like smoking, they do nothing to improve sporting prowess, and consumed regularly, contribute to obesity and related health problems.

"There is much to do to tackle obesity, and stating clearly that fast food has no place in sport, sends a clear message."

A McDonald's spokeswoman said the company would be serving "high quality British food quickly and safely" at the Olympics, as well as helping train more than 70,000 volunteers.

"Sponsorship is essential to the successful staging of the Olympics and Paralympics," she added.

"We recognise that public health issues like obesity are complex matters that cannot be solved by governments or companies alone.

"Ultimately it's up to individuals to make the right food, drink, and activity choices for themselves and our broad range of menu options in a variety of sizes, together with the nutrition information, means that customers can make more informed choices."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-18788655
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Wed, Jul-11-12, 02:42
howlovely howlovely is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 778
 
Plan: Paleo
Stats: 180/170/145 Female 70
BF:
Progress: 29%
Default

Would any company that produces healthy food even have the money to sponsor the Olympics? Of course not. McDonalds and Coca-Cola are rich enough to do so because they make a product that people want. Look, I agree that these companies sponsoring an event that showcases physical greatness is absurd, but to me this is not where we need to start.
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Wed, Jul-11-12, 06:01
KnitWhit KnitWhit is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 50
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 215/181/175 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 85%
Default

Let's not forget that while the athletes would clearly not regularly consume any of the sponsored crap, the people sitting on their couches watching the olympics would.

A knitting site called Ravelry just had a run-in with the people that protect the trademark 'Olympics'. That really opened my eyes to the fact that these games are just another corporate sponsored sporting event, not at all like it used to be at its inception.
Reply With Quote
  #5   ^
Old Wed, Jul-11-12, 12:51
Elizellen's Avatar
Elizellen Elizellen is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 10,733
 
Plan: Atkins (DANDR)
Stats: 290/141/130 Female 65.5 inches
BF:
Progress: 93%
Location: Bournemouth (UK)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KnitWhit
A knitting site called Ravelry just had a run-in with the people that protect the trademark 'Olympics'. That really opened my eyes to the fact that these games are just another corporate sponsored sporting event, not at all like it used to be at its inception.

We are expecting the Olympic flame relay to pass close to our stained glass supplies shop on Friday evening and I was thinking of making a window display using 5 circles of glass laid out like the olympic logo along with my Union Jack display left from my Jubilee celebration display.

However this week our local traders association circulated a memo with links to the official olympic website stating that using any of the "trademarks" of the games would bring down the wrath of the Olympic comittee on the perpetrator, even small independant shops like ours.

Only official sponsers are allowed to use any of their symbols!!

Apparently their representatives will be walking the route in advance of the flame to ensure that anyone displaying any of their symbols will be forced to dismantle them!!

Sheeesh!!
Reply With Quote
  #6   ^
Old Wed, Jul-11-12, 17:42
deirdra's Avatar
deirdra deirdra is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 3,847
 
Plan: HF/vLC/GF,CF,SF
Stats: 197/136/150 Female 66 inches
BF:
Progress: 130%
Location: Alberta
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elizellen
Only official sponsors are allowed to use any of their symbols!!
Use of the word "Olympic(s)" is also prohibited. In Calgary companies like Olympic Pizza (famous for their Greek food) that had been in business for 20+ years were forced to change their names before the 1988 Olympics. They had to pay the costs to change logos on storefronts, advertizing, stationary, pizza boxes, etc. themselves.
Reply With Quote
  #7   ^
Old Wed, Jul-11-12, 22:47
tragedian tragedian is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 944
 
Plan: atkins '72 -now ketogenic
Stats: 260/181.4/140 Female 5'8"
BF:
Progress: 65%
Location: Baltimore, MD, USA
Default

I just fail to see that this is a problem. This is about advertising, and to me the real problem is not...advertising. It's in the government and medical and agricultural sectors. I'm exposed to all the advertising the other Americans are, and...yet I'm not FORCED to buy coca cola. I AM however encouraged by the medical establishment and the government to eat copious amounts of carbohydrate. That's a much bigger issue imo.
Reply With Quote
  #8   ^
Old Sat, Jul-14-12, 23:59
Demi's Avatar
Demi Demi is offline
Posts: 21,957
 
Plan: LCHF/IF
Stats: 217/192/160 Female 5'10"
BF:
Progress: 44%
Location: UK
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KnitWhit
A knitting site called Ravelry just had a run-in with the people that protect the trademark 'Olympics'. That really opened my eyes to the fact that these games are just another corporate sponsored sporting event, not at all like it used to be at its inception.

Quote:
London 2012: The great Olympics sponsorship bandwagon

Once upon a time the Olympics was about amateurism and the pleasure of sport. But now there is a distinctly commercial ring to them. So has the Olympics become too much about sponsorship?

Every day there's inspirational footage of the torch relay in the British media.

But anyone lining the route has to wait as a veritable cavalcade of vehicles - with the relay's three sponsors Coca-Cola, Lloyds TSB and Samsung shouting over speakers and handing out flags - trundle by before the torch bearer eventually comes along.

It makes people realise that the commercial element is a massive part of the Games now.

Sponsorship has become increasingly important over recent years, both for the brands and the governing bodies footing the bill.

The UK government even passed a new law - the London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Act 2006 - which, together with the Olympic Symbol (Protection) Act of 1995, offers a special level of protection to the Games and their sponsors.

As well as introducing an additional layer of protection around the word "Olympics", the Games' mottoes and symbols, the law bans unauthorised "association". This bars non-sponsors from employing images or wording that might suggest a link to the Games.

The act has already led to stories of individuals and small businesses falling foul of the rules.

In 2007, Dennis Spurr, a butcher from the Fantastic Sausage Factory in Weymouth, Dorset, was reportedly told to take down a sign showing five sausage rings in the shape of the Olympic logo, with 2012 written underneath. He changed the rings to squares and 2012 to 2013.

Last year, bakers at the British Sugarcraft Guild were reportedly told that using Olympic symbols in icing and marzipan modelling would breach copyright.

Others caught up included a florist that put up Olympic rings made of tissue paper, and an 81-year-old woman hoping to sell a 1 doll - wearing a hand-knitted sports kit with a GB 2012 logo and Olympic rings - in a fund-raising sale.

The University of Derby was reportedly forced to take down a banner that read "supporting the London Olympics".

And last month, Birmingham Royal Ballet's artist director David Bintley was ordered to change the name of his latest production from Faster, Higher, Stronger - the Olympic motto - to Faster.

Critics have accused London Olympics organisers Locog of embarking on an extreme crackdown, and dubbed them the "Olympic brand police".

"Whilst the Olympic movement has every right to protect its registered trademarks and properties, I feel it has been allowed to go too far in protecting its sponsors in the case of the London Olympics. Proscribing certain everyday words only damages the tens of thousands of small businesses that might share in the Olympics feel good factor," says David Thorp, of the Chartered Institute of Marketing.

But Locog says the London 2012 brand is its "most valuable asset", and "if [it] did not take steps to protect it from unauthorised use and ambush marketing, the exclusive rights which [its] partners have acquired would be undermined".

It is not just the zeal with which Locog has been enforcing brand protection laws that has caused controversy.

Others have objected to the type of brands that have been chosen as official sponsors.

Human rights and environmental pressure groups have campaigned against BP, Dow Chemical - which now owns the firm behind the Bhopal gas leak disaster in 1984 - and Rio Tinto. All three companies have defended their ethical record.

Health issues have also been raised, with London Royal Free Hospital cardiologist Dr Aseem Malhotra saying it is "obscene" that the Olympics has chosen to associate itself with fast food (McDonald's), sugary drinks (Coca-Cola), chocolate (Cadbury's) and alcohol (Heineken) when there is an obesity epidemic.

Olympic boxing silver medallist Amir Khan has also criticised London 2012 organisers for allowing McDonald's to open its largest restaurant - which will have 1,500 seats - in the Olympic Park.

It's ultimately the IOC which sets the tone and picks the biggest "worldwide partners", which include McDonald's and Cola-Cola, while Locog selects other sponsors.

"The IOC only enters into partnerships with organisations that it believes work in accordance with the values of the Olympic Movement," a spokesman says.

The IOC notes that both Coca-Cola and McDonald's are longstanding sponsors and are involved in educational programmes to promote healthy lifestyles.

The extent of the exclusivity arrangements has also caused consternation, with McDonald's making headlines for a spat over its chip monopoly and Visa coming under fire for effectively banning the use of rival cards at Games venues.

Olympic fans have also had to contend with the confusion of renamed venues, with the O2 centre now called the North Greenwich Arena and Coventry's Ricoh Arena the City of Coventry Stadium.

Meanwhile, athletes have been warned not to tweet or blog about any brand that's not an official sponsor.

So why is the Olympics so much about sponsorship, when did it happen, and are the brand protection laws necessary?

Locog's position is simple. It says in order to stage the Games, it had to raise at least 700m in sponsorship, and it could not have done that if it did not offer its partners protection.

The IOC is similarly clear, saying without the support of its official commercial partners, the Games would not be able to happen.

"The partners' support allows more athletes from more countries to compete in the Games, and they deliver the services and resources that are the driving force of the Olympic Movement," says Gerhard Heiberg, chairman of the IOC Marketing Commission.

But for others, the "Olympic brand circus" is doing more harm than good.

"When you get brands parading like peacocks rather than sharing the real essence of the Olympic spirit - it becomes a farce verging on propaganda," says brand consultant Jonathan Gabay.

"There are now so many restrictions because of the sponsors that the 2012 Games are set to be more censored than the Beijing Games."

When you go back to the origins of the Games, the Olympics has almost done an 180-degree turn on its amateur and original ideals, says Tony Collins, director of the International Centre for Sports History and Culture at England's De Montfort University.

He says the first small sponsorship deals started to emerge in the 1930s, normally with local companies, and grew in the 1970s, but it wasn't until 1984 that the Los Angeles Olympic organising committee decided to pursue sponsorships. This came after the financial disaster of the 1976 Montreal Games.

The 1976 Games led to a change in the sponsorship model, according to Simon Chadwick, professor of sport business strategy and marketing at Coventry University Business School.

"In Montreal, the Olympic Games had 628 official partners, and a lot of them began to question whether they were seeing any value. Lots of fans and media became cynical and questioned the commercial nature of the Olympics, and the IOC were concerned about what was happening, so in 1984 they decided to stop selling lots of sponsorship for relatively small amounts of money and sell a few brands for a lot of money.

"Which is why if Coca-Cola is spending upwards of 100m for a right of association, which is clearly a huge amount of money, the IOC understands brands need category exclusivity."

Then there was the ambush marketing phenomenon - where non-sponsors tried to cunningly exploit the Games. The IOC obliged host nations to pass legislation to protect official sponsors from stunts, Chadwick says.

There is no protection for other specific events - such as those of Uefa or Fifa - within the UK, but there is in other countries, according to Phillip Johnson, barrister and associate professor of intellectual property law at University College Dublin. It is becoming part of a trend.

"Portugal granted local protection for Euro 2004. Italy gave protection to Turin for the 2006 Winter Olympics, Canada had protection for the 2010 Vancouver Games and Beijing has anti-ambush marketing laws as well. Brazil has already introduced its anti-ambush marketing laws for 2016."

But Johnson says although the 2006 Act has a "broad scope and the uncertainty makes the association right very controversial", as far as he is aware, although Locog has warned people not to do things and strongly exerted its rights, it has not actually started any proceedings for infringement of rights.

"Locog would have to be careful about which cases it brings as it does not want to damage the reputation of the Olympics by bringing the wrong case."



Protected words
Use of two words in Group A, or one word in Group A and one in Group B, could see you falling foul of Olympics sponsorship rules:

Group A
Games
Two Thousand and Twelve
2012
Twenty-Twelve

Group B
London
Medals
Sponsors
Summer
Gold
Silver
Bronze


Ambush marketing in action

  • 1984: Kodak sponsors TV broadcasts, despite Fuji being Los Angeles Olympics' official sponsor. Fuji returns favour at Seoul 1988 Games
  • 1992: Nike sponsors news conferences with the US basketball team. Michael Jordan accepts the gold medal for basketball and covers up his Reebok logo
  • 1994: American Express runs ads claiming Americans do not need "Visas" to travel to Norway for the Winter Olympics
  • 2000: Qantas Airlines' slogan "Spirit of Australia" coincidentally sounds like games slogan "Share the spirit" to chagrin of official sponsor Ansett Air
  • 2010: Dutch brewers Bavaria creates publicity stunt with women wearing orange mini-dresses in stadium during South Africa World Cup. Budweiser was authorised beer

How ambush marketing ambushed sport
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8743881.stm


List of Sponsors
http://www.london2012.com/about-us/...ympic-partners/



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-18182541

Last edited by Demi : Sun, Jul-15-12 at 00:09.
Reply With Quote
  #9   ^
Old Sun, Jul-15-12, 01:50
Demi's Avatar
Demi Demi is offline
Posts: 21,957
 
Plan: LCHF/IF
Stats: 217/192/160 Female 5'10"
BF:
Progress: 44%
Location: UK
Default

Quote:
Call to End Junk Food Sponsors From Future Sporting Events

High Olympic ideals of promoting sport and healthy living seem completely at odds with Big Macs, chicken nuggets, fries, sugar rich milkshakes and coke drinks. Yet McDonalds and Coca Cola, through sponsorship deals, will be the only food and soft-drink brands advertised at the London 2012 Games, at both game venues and through TV broadcasts to billions of worldwide viewers, including children.

A growing body of organisations, including the London Assembly and eminent voices in the medical profession, who understand the extent and cost of childhood obesity, are calling for companies whose products are associated with obesity, such as high fat, high calorific and sugar filled drinks, to be excluded from sponsorship of sporting events. This call could mark the start of a process similar to that of the tobacco advertising and sponsorship ban in the early 90s. This was also preceded by the medical profession highlighting health problems with calls for stricter laws on the sale and advertising of tobacco products.

Allowing such brands to sponsor international sporting events subliminally links these brands with health, athletes and sporting achievement. Opponents believe this undermines public health campaigns and sets efforts to promote healthy diets back by years. At the UEFA's Euro 2012 McDonalds adverts showed children that they had sponsored walking onto the pitch hand in hand with their football heroes. This advert was clearly targeted at children and designed to cajole brand loyalty. According to the McDonald's website this is part of their work to 'promote sport and physical activity'.

Restrictions on advertising foods high in fat, salt and sugar already exist on children's television and even Walt Disney recently announced a ban on fast food adverts on its television shows (once contractual commitments end). Yet, just as children watched UEFA's Euro 2012 and its ads, the London 2012 Games will offer no protection to children from such brand targeting. It is disappointing that the International Olympic Committee, responsible for the summer and winter Olympics/Paralympics, just extended McDonalds' and Coca Cola's sponsorship deals until 2020, which means the 2014 winter games in Sochi, the 2016 Olympics in Rio de Janeiro, the 2018 winter Games in Pyeongchang and the 2020 Olympics will have their imprint.

On 20 June 2012, at a full London Assembly meeting, a motion which I proposed, calling for a ban on sponsorship of future Olympic and Paralympic Games by companies which produce high calorie food and drink was agreed. The motion urged the Olympic movement to adopt strict criteria for sponsorship of Games which would exclude companies associated with products linked to childhood obesity, urged the Mayor of London Boris Johnson to encourage the organisers of future major sporting events in London (such as the London 2017 World Athletics Championships) to adopt a similar approach, and urged the Government to consider introducing restrictions on advertising and exclusive marketing at major sporting events by such food and drink companies.

A London Assembly report 'Tipping the Scales' estimated that almost a quarter of a million, or one in five children in London, are obese, and based on current trends predicted that half of children will be obese or overweight by 2020. It also found that children most at risk of becoming overweight or obese came from areas of deprivation.

Such concerns are not just limited to academic, public health and some political circles. Which Magazine [June 2012] found that 64% of UK adults they surveyed agreed that sponsors such as McDonalds and Coca Cola undermine the healthy ethos of the Olympics; 60% thought it encourages unhealthy eating and that it makes it harder to tackle obesity and poor diet.

Amir Khan, the youngest British Olympic boxing medalist at the 2004 Athens Olympics, referring to the 1,500 capacity cathedral like McDonalds in the Olympic village, and the largest in the world, said: "The Olympics are a great opportunity to show young people what types of food they need in different aspects of their life. I think this is a mistake"

Professor Terence Stephenson the vice chair of the Academy of Royal Medical Colleges, in April 2012 stated that the Government's voluntary approach of trusting the food industry to cut calories and advise people on healthy diets was inherently flawed and is failing to tackle obesity. He said: "It's very sad that an event [referring to the Olympics] that celebrates the very best of athletic achievements should be sponsored by companies contributing to the obesity problem and unhealthy habits".

With the scale and cost of treating obesity mushrooming, bodies responsible for public health such as the Government, Mayor of London and regulators can no longer turn a blind eye to this blatant marketing of junk food to children. It's time to show leadership and exercise a duty of care to those who are already overweight, obese, or belong to high risk groups who are disproportionately found in the most deprived communities with diets that are frequently limited to unhealthy and highly processed food. Challenging UEFA, IOC and other sporting bodies over their sponsorship deals with companies associated with products linked to childhood obesity is a fundamental and urgently needed step towards curbing the obesity epidemic.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/jen..._b_1667287.html
Reply With Quote
  #10   ^
Old Sun, Jul-15-12, 04:57
KnitWhit KnitWhit is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 50
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 215/181/175 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 85%
Default

Thanks, Demi. I'm glad it's not just me.
Reply With Quote
  #11   ^
Old Sun, Jul-15-12, 05:19
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
To Good Health!
Posts: 10,320
 
Plan: IF Fung/LC Westman/Primal
Stats: 222/171/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/25.3%/24%
Progress: 96%
Location: NC
Default

Have seen a few episodes of the "Twenty Twelve" mockumentary on YouTube and they seem to be getting away with all types of witty criticisms of the Olympics. Maybe the delicious lead man biking to work (calories out) covers for his Danish (calories in). Well any excuse to watch Hugh Bonneville is OK in my book. A delightful spoof not on the Olympic sponsorship bandwagon, starting with the title.
Reply With Quote
  #12   ^
Old Sun, Jul-15-12, 05:34
Demi's Avatar
Demi Demi is offline
Posts: 21,957
 
Plan: LCHF/IF
Stats: 217/192/160 Female 5'10"
BF:
Progress: 44%
Location: UK
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KnitWhit
Thanks, Demi. I'm glad it's not just me.
LOL, no, not just you!

Quote:
Originally Posted by JEY100
Have seen a few episodes of the "Twenty Twelve" mockumentary on YouTube and they seem to be getting away with all types of witty criticisms of the Olympics. Maybe the delicious lead man biking to work (calories out) covers for his Danish (calories in). Well any excuse to watch Hugh Bonneville is OK in my book. A delightful spoof not on the Olympic sponsorship bandwagon, starting with the title.
LOL, yes, Twenty Twelve is a great favourite of mine, and very typical of our British sense of humour. Even funnier is the fact that it is made by the BBC, who are the 'Official Olympic Broadcaster'!
Reply With Quote
  #13   ^
Old Mon, Jul-16-12, 04:12
Demi's Avatar
Demi Demi is offline
Posts: 21,957
 
Plan: LCHF/IF
Stats: 217/192/160 Female 5'10"
BF:
Progress: 44%
Location: UK
Default

And there's more ....

Quote:
Britain flooded with 'brand police' to protect sponsors

Hundreds of uniformed Olympics officers will begin touring the country today enforcing sponsors' multimillion-pound marketing deals, in a highly organised mission that contrasts with the scramble to find enough staff to secure Olympic sites.

Almost 300 enforcement officers will be seen across the country checking firms to ensure they are not staging "ambush marketing" or illegally associating themselves with the Games at the expense of official sponsors such as Adidas, McDonald's, Coca-Cola and BP.

The clampdown goes on while 3,500 soldiers on leave are brought in to bail out the security firm G4S which admitted it could not supply the numbers of security staff it had promised.

Yesterday, the Culture Secretary, Jeremy Hunt, refused to rule out that even more soldiers may be called upon to help with security, but dismissed the issue as merely a "hitch". However, as well as the regular Army, the Olympic "brand army" will start its work with a vengeance today.

Wearing purple caps and tops, the experts in trading and advertising working for the Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) are heading the biggest brand protection operation staged in the UK. Under legislation specially introduced for the London Games, they have the right to enter shops and offices and bring court action with fines of up to 20,000.

Olympics organisers have warned businesses that during London 2012 their advertising should not include a list of banned words, including "gold", "silver" and "bronze", "summer", "sponsors" and "London".

Publicans have been advised that blackboards advertising live TV coverage must not refer to beer brands or brewers without an Olympics deal, while caterers and restaurateurs have been told not to advertise dishes that could be construed as having an association with the event.

At the 40 Olympics venues, 800 retailers have been banned from serving chips to avoid infringing fast-food rights secured by McDonald's.

Marina Palomba, for the McCann Worldgroup agency in London, described the rules as "the most draconian law in advance of an Olympic Games ever". The ODA and Locog (London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games) say the rules are necessary to protect brands.

"These rights are acquired by companies who invest millions of pounds to help support the staging of the Games," Locog said. "People who seek the same benefits for free by engaging in ambush marketing or producing counterfeit goods are effectively depriving the Games of revenue."

Some 1.4bn of the Games' 11.4bn budget comes from private sector sponsors. The International Olympic Committee's 11 global partners, including Coca-Cola, Visa and Proctor & Gamble, are contributing 700m while 700m comes from London 2012 partners, including Adidas, BT, EDF, and Lloyds TSB.

The scale of the brand enforcement squad is nonetheless likely to intensify criticism that the Olympics has become too corporate. Paul Jordan, an expert in brand protection at Bristows solicitors who advises firms on the rules, said they were almost certainly tougher than at previous Olympics. "No other brands would have people walking the streets being their eyes and ears, protecting their interests," he said.

A spokesman for the Olympic Delivery Authority, whose team of 286 enforcement officers have been seconded from 30 local councils, said it had a duty to ensure businesses were meeting the rules.

"We are using experienced local authority staff who currently enforce street trading and advertising legislation. They have all been fully trained," the spokesman said.

"Deliberate ambush offences will be dealt with using the full enforcement powers conferred on officers."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...rs-7945436.html
Reply With Quote
  #14   ^
Old Mon, Jul-16-12, 16:35
jmh's Avatar
jmh jmh is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 480
 
Plan: my own
Stats: 224/182/165 Female 175cm
BF:
Progress: 71%
Location: Was in London, now in NZ
Default

Quote:
They have all been fully trained," the spokesman said.


Pity they didn't put the same amount of effort into training the security staff.
Reply With Quote
  #15   ^
Old Wed, Jul-25-12, 11:31
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
To Good Health!
Posts: 10,320
 
Plan: IF Fung/LC Westman/Primal
Stats: 222/171/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/25.3%/24%
Progress: 96%
Location: NC
Default

Zoe Harcombe weighs in with ten facts about Olympic sponsorship:
http://www.zoeharcombe.com/2012/07/...-food-sponsors/
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 21:35.


Copyright © 2000-2018 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.