Olympic committees have, in the past, targeted knitters and newspapers in seeking to protect their name. When it comes to the Olympic logo being used throughout a Russian anti-gay TV program, they remain silent.
WASHINGTON — The International Olympic Committee has expressed no concern over a Russian state television program that warned of a "homosexualist invasion" last week, in contrast to decades of practice in which it feverishly protected its brand.
A spokesperson for the IOC said the group did not support the ideas in the program, which aired on state-run television and featured the Olympic logo throughout, while presenting LGBT activism as a western plot threatening the Russian state.
"The IOC believes there is no place for homophobia or discriminatory views of any nature in the Olympic Movement," Emmanuelle Moreau, the IOC head of media relations, told BuzzFeed. Yet she dismissed concerns from Russian and international activists that some of the report's content came from the state's bugging of private meetings. "Having watched the programme, it is unclear what, if any, of the footage was collected illegally," Moreau said.
She continued, "The IOC in no way shares the discriminatory views expressed by some participants in this programme. The channel has acquired the right to broadcast the Sochi Games in the host country and has the symbol on display throughout its programming, but it does not indicate any IOC endorsement of the views expressed."
That statement seems to contradict past remarks and practice by the IOC and its president, Thomas Bach, which have identified brand-protection as a top priority for Olympic organizers.
In discussing the IOC's marketing and TV efforts in the "manifesto" he presented while running his ultimately successful campaign for IOC president earlier this year, Bach repeatedly stressed that television could advance the Olympic brand and its principles.
Regarding "selling our TV rights," he wrote, the IOC's "ultimate objective has to be the universal promotion of the Olympic Games and of our values." The IOC also should, he wrote, "continue to explore options for a greater TV presence for Olympic sports and its values during the periods between Olympic Games."
Brand management was also identified as a key concern following the 2008 games in Beijing.
In its final report for the Beijing games, the IOC Coordinating Commission stated that "[m]anaging the Games' image and reputation was undoubtedly one of the most delicate and challenging aspects of the Games that the organisers and the IOC were required to face together." Regarding the Olympic symbols themselves, it concluded, "Unfortunately, certain events on the international route of the Olympic Torch Relay attracted public criticism and resulted in misappropriation of the Games symbols," the report said, referring to human rights protests staged along the route. The commission noted for future Olympics that "important lessons must be learned from this experience."
These statements reflect the attitude that has been demonstrated in legal action by national Olympic committees going back at least thirty years. In recent decades, Olympic affiliates have sought to block many different groups from using the games in ways it believes degrades their brand and what it represents. These include:
Via gaygames.org
The United States Olympic Committee [USOC] went to court in the early 1980s to prevent San Francisco Arts and Athletics Inc. from holding a sporting event billed as the "Gay Olympic Games."
The case went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which ultimately ruled 7-2 against San Francisco Arts and Athletics, establishing that the USOC has broad protections for its brand well beyond normal control over its logo and other branding materials normally granted to corporations. The court also rejected San Francisco Arts and Athletics argument that it was making a political statement about the marginalization of gays and lesbians.
The event continues as the Gay Games.