The Controversy of the 2022 Winter Olympics: Censorship and Boycotts

The 2022 Winter Olympics hosted by China are being discussed on the cost, environmental impact, censorship, espionage, Covid-19, and sports-washing. Human rights issues are also being addressed rather than the unifyingness of sports.

– The Chinese government spends $3.9 billion on the Games. But the real cost might be more than $38.5 billion, 10 times the reported amount.

– The USA, UK, Canada, India, and Australia are boycotting the Olympics at the diplomatic level. Lithuania, Kosovo, Belgium, Denmark, and Estonia join them in protest against China’s human rights record. (China has been accused of systemic abuses against the Muslim Uyghur minority in the Xinjiang region.)

– Criticism is rising that the Olympics are being used by the Chinese government for sports-washing purposes. The aim is to distract from human rights abuses or other problems.

– The Beijing Organizing Committee warned about the consequences. “Any act or speech that violates the Olympic spirit is subject to certain penalties.” This includes violations of Chinese laws and regulations. All circles agree that this is outright censorship!

– Those attending the Games, including athletes, spectators and media, have to use the My2022 app for daily Covid tracking. Users are warned about security weaknesses and data privacy in the application. It is said that some countries are telling athletes to leave their phones at home and prefer disposable phones in China.

– China has been criticized for environmental impact. Since there is very little precipitation in the region, approximately 1.2 million cubic meters of artificial snow will be used. Although China says that these Olympics are ‘green‘ and use new technologies, it has not been able to convince everyone in this regard.

_{^{Olympic eco-system and brands!}}

Let’s come to another critical issue: Big global brands are actually sponsoring these Olympics. Their governments boycotted the games due to human rights concerns.

Isn’t it a contradiction that these brands support the highly controversial Olympics in China? Meanwhile, they are active advocates of political rights, freedom, equality, and human rights at a global level. They also have high ratings and publish series of reports on environmental, social, and governance fields.

When considering sustainability, aren’t these brands at great risk? Is their credibility and reputation compromised?

Yes, it is not possible for brands to sacrifice the Chinese market economically. However, in terms of reputation and brand management, how will brands that stand behind the athlete in America take a stand? They even make TV commercials. What will they do if, for example, an athlete criticizes China about human rights at the Olympics? How will this affect the consumers of that brand in geographies outside of China? Multi-layered and challenging decisions for brands!

Finally, the main question is this: Will the decision to sponsor the 2022 Winter Olympics in China impact the ESG rating of these brands? Will this happen in the near future?

In the name of sustainability, this should have a counterpart on the ideal and moral axis. But will it happen, we’ll see…

---