Ambush Marketing vs. the Olympics

Good Evening Ladies and Gentleman. Welcome to Late Night Critic.

The 2014 Winter Olympics are upon us. America is off to a fair start, and the US Hockey team had a thrilling game against Russia winning in overtime (America's record is now 3-0). However some of the athletes aren't fairing so well, such as the speed skaters. They were favorites coming in to the Olympics, but for reasons unknown they have yet to medal. Its been speculated that their new suits, Under Armour's "Mach 39", have been the problem, and so the USA speed skating team has dropped the uniforms. Normally "any advertising is good advertising", however I feel that doesn't apply here.

The results of the Olympics, however interesting they may be, are not what this blog was made for. I want to present some of the more controversial advertising based off the Olympics. Who is using ambush marketing and is that strategy even fair? Also, I want to discuss who should not be allowed to sponsor the Olympic's and why.

What is Ambush Marketing?
Companies who do not pay to sponsor a specific event (whether it be sporting or otherwise) but use symbolism or loopholes to advertise near or around that event are using a technique called "ambush marketing". The difference between official advertising and ambush marketing boils down to a lack of paid fee's to be on air or present at the event. An example from the Super Bowl of ambush marketing would be the commercial seen below. Produced by Newcastle Brown Ale the spot was a behind the scenes look at a commercial that never aired. There were multiple variations, but the main point was that Newcastle couldn't even used the phrase "Super Bowl". Here Anna Kendrick is interviewed about the commercial that could have been, and she isn't too happy about its cancellation.

Now that you all know what ambush marketing is, what are your thoughts? (Let me know in the comments!)
I am a firm believer in competition breeding excellence. And that is essentially what ambush marketing does, create competition. In my opinion it is fair and sometimes even necessary for ambush marketing to take place. It shouldn't be enough for a company to just buy ad space, or in the case of the Olympics, official sponsorship. Companies should have to earn their advertising and through that earn their consumers interest. Besides, if a company who paid to advertise with the official Olympic logo and at the event itself can't garner as much attention as a company who advertises in round-a-bout way then that's the official sponsors fault. I think that ambush marketing is necessary in all forms.

Who has used this method so far during the 2014 Winter Olympics Games?
Subway is well-known for their use of ambush marketing based advertising. They somehow are able to evoke thoughts of big sporting events (aka the Olympics) without a single mention of the event or even insinuating about the event.
Zippo managed to pull off an amazing feat this year as well, while the Olympic Torch was being run through Kremlin, Russia the flame died out. A policeman pulled out a Zippo to light the flame again and within 24 hours Zippo had created a page and hash-tag around "Zippo Saves Olympics". This eventually was changed after Zippo was contacted by the 2014 Winter Games officials.

Who shouldn't be advertising?

Sadly the connection between McDonald's and the Olympics is old and strong, despite the fact that the two are nothing alike. The problem with McDonald's advertising with the Olympics is that it puts in young consumer's minds that fast-food is connected to sports glory. In a world where childhood obesity is rising why is a company like McDonald's allowed to support the greatest athletic spectacle known to man?Because McDonald's has been a sponsor since 1976. The Olympics are remain loyal to their age-old sponsors.
However there is hope, during the 2012 London games the Olympics discussed ending their partnerships with unhealthy sponsors. Companies such as McDonald's, Coca-Cola, and others will have to promote their products through healthier messages to retain their sponsorship rights. The results of this discussion have yet to be seen, as all companies listed in the memo are still advertising at the 2014 Sochi games.

Companies Achieving Olympic Gold
On a side note, the top rated sponsor of the Olympics so far is P&G with their commercials based around a moms work and the jobs they have in raising Olympic athletes (seen below is one example). Other top Olympic sponsors are Febreze and United Airlines. (MarketWatch.com)

This week in BBB: Dewars Scotch
With our eye on international advertising throughout the Olympics I thought it would be fun to look at a BBB focused on international mishaps. I consider myself a whiskey connoisseur and so when it comes to advertisements about whiskey I shut up and listen. There are some great ones (see Johnnie Walker), but that isn't what BBB is all about. I have to say one of my least favorite commercials of all time is Dewars Scotch "Drinking Man". First, the idea of a scotch for the "drinking man" is insanely inconsiderate. There are many people in the world today suffering from alcoholism, and this advertisement basically says "we're the drink of choice for alcoholics", not cool. Secondly, Dewars is pushing the Scottish idea much too far. The actress is British and she is using a simple Scottish accent. You don't have to push the Scottish theme! It's almost in the name for Pete sake.

So what is the lesson learned?

Choose your words (and accents in this case!) carefully, you never know who could interpret you in the wrong way.

Thank you for reading,

AO