Kicking Coke out of the Olympics? The full story behind the boycott of a soft drinks giant’s multi-billion sponsorship
The initiative contends that “Big Soda” – soft drink industry giants epitomised by Coca-Cola and Pepsi – use sponsorships of major sporting events to tether their brands to the excitement of elite competition and celebrated athletes. Yet in truth, the sugar-laden beverages they produce are exacting a heavy toll on public health and the environment.
In the campaign’s promotional video, a young person spits out a mouthful of cola and shouts, “Hey, Big Soda! I’m not falling for your sports-washing.” The call to action urges the International Olympic Committee to cancel its sponsorship agreement with Coca-Cola and to partner exclusively with brands that reflect the traditional values of the Olympic Games.
I.“Big Soda”: Tobacco of the New Era?
Around 2010, the term ‘Big Soda’ was coined by media outlets and several public interest groups campaigning for health and environmental protection. Modeled on the monikers ‘Big Oil’ and ‘Big Tobacco’, it highlights the harms of sugar-sweetened beverages like Coca-Cola and warns of the immense commercial and policy lobbying power wielded by the soft drinks industry.
Among the various challenges launched against ‘Big Soda’ in recent years, the ‘Kick Big Soda Out of Sport’ campaign—targeting their Olympic sponsorship rights—has undoubtedly been the most high-profile. This inevitably evokes memories of the anti-tobacco movement and the eventual removal of cigarette advertising from sporting events. In 1988, following years of global anti-smoking advocacy, the Winter Olympics in Canada rejected sponsorship from tobacco companies for the first time, effectively ending the presence of tobacco ads on the Olympic stage thereafter.
‘Soda is the new tobacco for young people.‘ So wrote Dr Chris Van Tulleken, an infectious diseases specialist at University College London Hospital and author of *The Ultra-Processed People*, in a column for the *Daily Mail*. He argues that Coca-Cola should be barred from sponsoring the Olympics, just as we once banned cigarette giants from doing so.
The “Kick Beverage Giants Out of Sport” campaign shares this objective. In a tweet posted on 31 July, they wrote: “Hey, beverage giants, remember when Big Tobacco was booted out of sports sponsorship? You’re next. The game is over. Take your sugary drinks out of sport.”
By 5 August, the petition had gathered over 100,000 signatures and secured partnerships with more than 70 organisations, including several prominent health bodies such as the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), the NCD Alliance, and Resolve to Save Lives.
In a statement, the CSPI highlighted the controversy surrounding Coca-Cola’s sponsorship of the world’s largest and most prestigious sporting event, noting: “Athletes from around the globe train for years to peak during the Olympic season; their strength, endurance, and stamina clearly do not come from fizzy drinks.”
II. Why Are “Beverage Giants” So Keen on Securing Sports Industry Endorsement?
A growing body of scientific research demonstrates that the consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages, such as cola, has significantly fuelled the global rise in obesity, type 2 diabetes, and cardiovascular disease. A 2013 study examined the link between soft drink consumption and overweight, obesity, and type 2 diabetes across 75 countries. The findings revealed that, when controlling for other dietary factors, income, urbanisation, and age, every 1 per cent increase in soft drink intake corresponds to an additional three overweight adults, 2.3 obese adults, and 0.3 adults with diabetes per 100 people.
Confronted with irrefutable scientific evidence, the astute ‘beverage giants’ have opted to leverage sporting events to whitewash the health hazards associated with sugar-sweetened drinks.
A 2018 paper in *BMC Public Health* noted that when audiences are exposed to promotions for unhealthy food brands while watching sporting events, they are more likely to associate the competition with the brand. Further research has shown that when a food product is endorsed by a professional athlete, parents tend to perceive it as healthier, making them more inclined to purchase it.
This is precisely how Coca-Cola operates. On its official website, the company states: “We like to support what matters to our consumers.” Our consumers tell us they are passionate about sport, particularly the pinnacle of world sporting events: the Olympic Games. From sponsoring the 1928 Summer Olympics in Amsterdam to 2032, when its current contract is set to expire, Coca-Cola’s partnership with the Games will span more than a century.
According to marketing news outlet Marketing Brew, Coca-Cola surged to become the most prolific sponsor of sporting events in 2023, even surpassing Nike, with an estimated $5 billion spent on advertising and marketing.
The advantages of aligning major beverage corporations with sporting events are unmistakable.
Surveys reveal that American viewers of the 2008 Olympics demonstrated significantly higher brand awareness for companies that poured the most capital into sponsorship, such as Coca-Cola and McDonald’s. During the 2014 World Cup, Coca-Cola’s Facebook following swelled by 2.5 million, eclipsing every other sponsor. At the 2018 FIFA World Cup, the three most popular advertisements came from soft drink brands: Pepsi, Gatorade (a PepsiCo brand), and Coca-Cola.
Beyond sponsoring elite international tournaments and teams, these beverage giants routinely pour vast sums into securing top-tier athletes as brand ambassadors. In Bloomberg Businessweek’s 2010 list of the 100 most influential athletes, the food and beverage sector emerged as the second largest category for endorsements, ranking just behind sports equipment and apparel.
Yet, elite athletes increasingly aware of the health dangers associated with sugary drinks have begun to turn their backs on these industry titans. During a press conference at the 2020 European Championship, football legend Cristiano Ronaldo famously slid two bottles of Coca-Cola out of the way, raised a bottle of water, and uttered a single word: “Water.”
III. “Beverage Giants” and Environmental Justice
According to a report from Greenpeace（Greenpeace）last year, Coca-Cola alone produces 100 billion single-use plastic drink bottles annually. Many of these are eventually discarded in landfills or wash into the oceans. As the report states, “Coca-Cola’s iconic red bottles increasingly symbolise environmental harm.”
Also in 2023, The New York Times reported on the plastic pollution crisis in New York State’s Buffalo River. Much of the waste traced back to PepsiCo products, including household names such as Pepsi and Lay’s potato chips.
In 2014, Bart J. Elmore, Professor of Global Environmental History at Ohio State University, published The Coca-Cola Empire: A History of Resource Plunder (Citizen Coke: The Making of Coca-Cola Capitalism), detailing how the company leveraged a distinctive business model to build a sprawling cola production network at minimal cost.
Rather than producing the finished drink itself, Coca-Cola sells only syrup, with distributors worldwide responsible for adding the water. This arrangement enables the company to continuously draw on public and natural resources, including water and transport infrastructure, while sparking fierce resistance in water-stressed, low-income regions such as Saudi Arabia and India.
The good news is that governments in several countries have taken steps to curb the public health and environmental harms caused by ‘beverage giants’—currently, nations such as France, Hungary, and Malaysia, along with various US states and cities, have begun levying soft drink taxes. However, the lobbying might of these ‘beverage giants’ remains formidable.
In 2012, then-New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg backed a proposal to restrict the sale of sugary drinks. The measure sought to cap the portion size of sugar-sweetened soft drinks sold in restaurants, cinemas, and sports venues at 470ml. This move faced opposition from beverage companies like PepsiCo, numerous restaurants, and several civil rights organisations that received funding from ‘beverage giant’ brands. In 2013, the New York State Supreme Court struck down the proposal, ruling it lacked sufficient legal grounds.
Advertising Age (Advertising Age) noted in a 2016 article that the tactics employed by ‘beverage giants’ to counter legislation targeting carbonated drinks closely mirrored the strategies long utilised by tobacco and alcohol conglomerates. That same year, a report in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine revealed that Coca-Cola and PepsiCo had even funded at least 96 health-focused organisations, with the ‘soda giants’ cultivating ties to health bodies ‘to project a positive image for their brands’.
– Petition –
Dear International Olympic Committee:
Sugar-sweetened beverages harm both people and the planet. By accepting billions of dollars in sponsorship from Coca-Cola, the Olympic Games enable the International Olympic Committee (IOC) to tacitly endorse a world where health and environmental damage are “sportwashed”, undermining the promise to create a better world through sport. The harms are primarily as follows:
◉ Threats to Health
Sugar-sweetened beverages are a primary driver of rising rates of obesity, type 2 diabetes, and heart disease. With Coca-Cola’s sponsorship continuing, how does the IOC intend to honour its commitment to the WHO to promote healthy societies through sport, advance Sustainable Development Goal 3 (“Good Health and Well-being”), and prevent non-communicable diseases?
◉ Environmental Damage
Plastic pollution, carbon emissions, and water depletion are severe global issues and major drivers of the climate crisis. With Coca-Cola’s sponsorship continuing, how does the IOC intend to uphold its commitment to the Paris Agreement on climate change?
◉ Advertising Targeting Our Next Generation
Exposure to unhealthy food marketing is a leading risk factor for childhood obesity. With Coca-Cola’s sponsorship continuing, how does the IOC plan to shield children from marketing for unhealthy products while fulfilling its commitment to youth fitness and health?
As the leader of the Olympic Movement and guardian of its values, the IOC has a responsibility to place the health and well-being of people and the planet above the corporate interests of beverage giants.
1. Terminate Coca-Cola’s sponsorship of the Olympic Games.
2. Pledge not to accept sponsorship from companies that harm public health and the environment in the future.
3. Accept sponsorship only from companies that genuinely align with Olympic values, such as those that promote health and sustainable development.
By kicking beverage giants out of the Olympic Games, the IOC will demonstrate to the world that it is committed not just to talking about these values, but to truly making the world a better place through sport.
Editor: Zeen