On
Sunday night at the Rio Olympics, in the 100-meter track final, “The
man, the myth, the running legend lived up to his name that we dare not
mention.” That’s according to a summary of the action by the @rule40
Twitter account.
The summary is referring to Jamaican runner Usain Bolt, of course. But the account is showing faux deference to Rule 40, the US Olympic Committee’s restrictions against brands
that are not official Olympics sponsors. While the account can be
humorous, its overall tone is quite serious: non-official sponsors are
angry about the rule, and are fighting back.
Who’s behind the account? The Berkshire Hathaway-owned sneaker company Brooks Running, based in Seattle, which sponsors 12 athletes competing at this year’s Olympics. Brooks CEO Jim Weber says Rule 40 must change.
In
addition to the @rule40 Twitter handle, Brooks owns the rule40.com
domain name, and is using both to wage a PR war against the USOC.
Under
Rule 40 guidelines, non-official sponsors cannot refer to the Olympics
in any marketing, advertising, or social media during a blackout period
that begins nine days before the opening ceremony and ends three days
after the closing ceremony. During the blackout, athletes can post about
their sponsors if they don’t also mention the Olympics in the same
post, a catch that is new this year as part of a change to the rule. (In
the past, the athletes couldn’t post about their non-Olympics sponsors
at all during the blackout, and non-Olympics sponsors could not post
about their Olympic athletes at all during the blackout.)
The rule is unpopular with non-Olympics sponsors and with many athletes, but it is rooted in the USOC’s special heightened trademark protection from Congress.
And the USOC argues that it must police social media so vigorously
because if it relaxed its rules there would be less value in its official sponsorships, which big consumer brands like Coca-Cola and Panasonic have reportedly spent $200 million on.
It was the Wall Street Journal that first outed Brooks as the company behind the anti-Rule 40 campaign,
reporting in July that the domain name was registered to the director
of sports marketing at Brooks. Brooks, the WSJ wrote, had gone
“undercover.”
View photos
Brooks CEO Jim Weber confirmed the role Brooks has in the anti-Rule 40 campaign, and expanded on it to Yahoo Finance.
“We
launched rule40.com to draw attention to the restrictions it places on
athletes and their ability to market themselves during the highest
profile time of their running careers,” he says.
Brooks
is not alone: Oiselle, a women’s athletic apparel brand also based in
Seattle (it’s pronounced “wa-ZELL”), has joined in the effort. Its CEO,
Sally Bergesen, has been an outspoken opponent of Rule 40, using her
Twitter account to criticize and appearing on television. (See above
Yahoo Finance video for more.) Bergesen’s hope is to spur change for
next time, in 2020—change such as allowing track & field athletes to
display the name and logo of a sponsor on their uniform. (They
currently cannot, while swimmers and golfers, for example, can, which
critics see as arbitrary.)
As the LA Times reported, the rule has led to a lot of snark. For example, Oiselle on its official corporate blog began referring to the Olympics as “the big event in the southern hemisphere.”
The
Rule 40 campaign, Weber cautions, is not about Brooks. It is about the
athletes. “We wanted to bring forward the facts of the situation that so
many athletes find themselves in and present them in a playful,
tongue-in-cheek fashion… [and] highlight its negative impact. We hope
it’s a good start to a bigger conversation. We believe the rules have to
change in order for athletes to benefit from the years they invest in
their athletic careers. We think Rule 40 should change.”
Culled from yahoo finance
No comments:
Post a Comment