The threat of Social Media
The online article "Brands winning big at London Olympics", by Sophie Woodrooffe, at the link http://www.prdaily.com/marketing/Articles/12219.aspx, talks about the effects of social media on advertising in the 2012 London Olympic Games. Since the games in Atlanta, Nike has developed a brand identity as the product of champions without even being an official sponsor of the games. This happened because of Michael Johnson's broken world record at the 1996 Atlanta Olympic Games wearing his golden Nike's. With massive advertisements around Olympic Park, Nike overshadowed the actual sponsor, Reebok, from becoming the dominant brand.
This gave brand equity, or more money spent on the brand named product because of quality, for Nike and caused an outbreak of Nike runners. Once people began buying Nike running shoes, the halo effect, or buying a product because you liked other products made by the same company, began as Nike extended it's product line.
In my opinion, the restrictions on social media comments of athletes were a bit overbearing. Yes, the sponsors of the Olympics should be protected, because they paid for the sponsorship, but the athletes should be more focused on their events rather than giving a shout out to a companies product.
Social Media can be used positively by a company, but also must be responsible with methods of advertising.
