If fans want to hit FIFA where it hurts they should look at their media deals, not sponsors
While sponsors have been urged to boycott FIFA the media, which pays billions for World Cup rights, are the ones that carry real power for reform argues Andrew Woodward.
The events and subsequent coverage over the last week of the various shenanigans involving FIFA and its band of merry men and women have been remarkable, astonishing and concerning on so many fronts.
But as one of the relative few who has seen all of this on the inside, I must say I am somewhat bemused by the witch-hunt against sponsors.
I work in marketing, communications and public affairs and part of my career saw me carry a Visa Inc business card as global head of brand and sponsorship communications, based in San Francisco, looking after “PR” for the Olympics, FIFA, NFL and MLS sponsorships. Last week when the FIFA arrests story broke, hordes of public and media marched toward sponsors, including my former employer, brandishing torches and pitchforks.
I think the issue Andrew is that media organisations aren’t saying “hey we love football so you should love us” in the same way brands do with sponsorship. Media is usually just seen as a “pipe” by consumers. They engage with channels if they serve the content they want. Like Soccer. So to equate the role of sponsorship and media rights is a little like comparing things that can’t really be compared. Consumers need media to air their passion. They don’t need brands to sponsor it. Hence my view, but mere opinion at this point, is that consumers may well resent brands that sponsor a corrupt organisation who brings their favourite game into disrepute. They are less likely to stop watching it on TV. Or dislike the channel as a result. Football may well be the biggest sponsorship in the world. But brands do have other choices. If they see consumer resentment of them part funding FIFA they can and should exit fast. It’s not about ‘punishing’ FIFA it’s about protecting your brand. I await some actual brand sentiment tracking with bated breath.
“the public doesn’t care about corruption in football. “I stand by this claim. Evidence? On Saturday night, over 70,000 people attended the Olympic Stadium in Sydney to see a reserve grade level Sydney FC play a touring Tottenham Hotspur.” – This is quite possibly the most ridiculous statement I’ve ever read.
The very reason people care about corruption is because they care about the game. If it was corruption in the Badminton Association I’d be less concerned.
What’s the correlation between supporting your A League side and FIFA corruption?
I’m three or four steps removed from FIFA when I buy a ticket.
I don’t stop voting or believing in democracy because of political corruption why should Football be any different? And yes I will stop using VISA if they knowingly sponsor a corrupt organization. Why? Because it’s their money funding things directly and I don’t have to give them any more of mine if I don’t want to.
Good follow-up, Woodie.
Everybody knows that the choice of Qatar could not have been made without some serious money changing hands; No right minded person would agree to stage a World Cup there in such heat (or are there those among the FIFA organisation who think the climate will change dramatically, miraculously even, before the kick-off?).
If Blatter is the Mr Clean that he likes to portray at press conferences, maybe he should call for a change of venue, giving whatever reason he will: along with evidence of substantial payments by Qatar to the families of ‘expat’ workers who have died working on building the Qatar stadium. That would be a start; he might oblige the sporting world then by professsing he is ill (a septic bladder?) and is stepping down for health reasons.
Or am I being naive (as well as outraged)
That’s why it is called the 3rd World Game – ethics be damned.