OLYMPICS:THE LINKED rings on every Chinese Coke bottle and the leaping athletes on each McDonald's paper bag testify to the power the world's biggest corporations believe this summer's Olympics wields.
But having spent huge sums, the companies sponsoring the Beijing games are about to find themselves the targets of a new, more vigorous war on China's human rights record by campaigners boosted by the success of protests along the torch relay route.
A coalition of Tibetan groups yesterday warned Coca-Cola that it would be "complicit in a humanitarian disaster" unless it used its influence to ensure Tibet was dropped from the torch route. And tomorrow, Dream for Darfur will launch a critical "report card" on sponsors of the games.
Campaigners are urging companies to press the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and Beijing for change - or risk damaging their brands. "Companies [who do not act] will get physical protests; they will get letters; we will ask people to turn off their adverts," said Ellen Freudenheim, director of corporate outreach at Dream for Darfur, which argues they should press China to put pressure on Sudan as its major oil buyer.
"Sponsors don't make policy and we understand that. But . . . they have lobbying firms; they have international presences and they all do engage in politics."
Canny activists are targeting the stars who represent the brands too: George Clooney has already said he has raised the issue of Darfur with Omega, the Olympic sponsor and watch manufacturer which he advertises. The aim is to create a domino effect as spokespeople or consumers pressure sponsors, who in turn push the IOC into lobbying China.
Each of the 12 global partners for this year's event have paid £30 million (€37.5 million) to £40 million for a four-year deal.
An IOC spokeswoman said yesterday: "A number of companies engage in partnerships with the IOC and the Olympic Movement to help us fund the work we do and spread the Olympic values."
In the period 2001-2004, sponsors contributed $1,459 million (€913 million), 39 per cent of the IOC's revenue.
Last week, Human Rights Watch accused "cowardly" partners of remaining "largely silent" in the face of abuses; just a few days earlier Reporters Without Borders disrupted Coca-Cola's annual general meeting.
Campaigners say some sponsors are raising concerns privately.
"Realistically, everyone who signed up for Beijing knew there were various risks involved," said Damien Ryan, a Hong Kong-based media consultant. But he acknowledged that this "risk factor has escalated".
Activists are well aware that multinationals hope sponsoring the games will give them privileged access to 1.3 billion increasingly wealthy people without entrenched purchasing habits.
Sponsors argue it is unfair to hold them responsible for every action by the Chinese authorities.
Sportswear giant Adidas, a Beijing rather than IOC partner, said sponsors "should not be expected to solve political issues. We clearly see the limits of our influence."
A Coca-Cola spokesperson said it had supported the Olympics since 1928, expressed "deep concern" for the situation in Tibet and cited its support for charities in Sudan.
- (Guardian service)