Right or wrong, ‘Goliath’ can never escape bad press
Contributors are not employed, compensated or governed by TD, opinions and statements are from the contributor directly
Large corporate entities get a bad press. From Starbucks being depicted as the headquarters of inept megalomaniac, Dr Evil, in the movie Austin Powers, to the annual smashing of McDonalds restaurant windows in May Day riots, there just seems to be something about these companies that doesn’t sit easily with us. Often the criticism is unjust; but sometimes these large corporates don’t do themselves any favours.
This week we saw two examples of this; the global football governing body, FIFA stamped its authority on the 2010 World Cup by ordering a low-cost carrier to drop an advertising campaign due to unauthorised use of FIFA-trademarked symbols, and even use of the word ‘South Africa’. Meanwhile Hollywood ordered ‘Lord of the Rings’; director, Peter Jackson, not to erect a ‘Wellywood’ sign near Wellington, New Zealand. Such incidents leave most of use rolling our eyes, wondering how these organisations can be so petty. But are we right to?
In the case of FIFA, budget airline kulula.com had marketed itself as the ‘Unofficial National Carrier of the You-Know-What’, with pictures of stadia and national flags. It was a tactical piece of tongue-in-cheek ambush marketing, which the carrier probably knew was sailing close to the wind. Heidi Brauer, Marketing Manager of the airline’s holding company, Comair Ltd, told the BBC that kulula.com was “surprised by FIFA’s complaint”. I doubt they were. FIFA has already clamped down on unofficial merchandisers in South Africa, right down to World Cup key ring salesmen. It was unlikely to ignore that piece of blatant infringement.
In the case of Jackson’s Wellywood sign, the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce (HCC) warned the director that the sign ‘Hollywood’ sign is trademarked. “It’s fine for them to put up a sign, just don’t duplicate ours,” HCC President, Leron Gubler, said. And in a way he’s right. How iconic would the Hollywood sign remain if one was erected in every city?
Whatever the legality of either case, the fact is that the publicity generated by such incidents can never serve the larger company well. It is human nature for people to root for the underdog. When David fought Goliath, I can’t imagine many neutrals supporting the big man. Yes, we realise that corporates have to protect their trademarks, but such is the bad publicity such battles generate, one wonders if they are worth the effort.
Comments are closed.