Sports fans call obstruction on tricky Sponsorships

Sports fans call obstruction on tricky Sponsorships

  • Sport

5th December 2022

 

Sports fans have political opinions, too, and they’re starting to get louder about them - especially in Australia. As the very controversial World Cup unfolds in Qatar, political topics continue to polarise the public worldwide. Teams' & athletes' behaviours are being scrutinised and tested, and so are their sponsors.  

Australians fans are weighing in on who funds their favourite teams in the wake of leading mining company Hancock Prospecting pulling millions of dollars worth of sponsorship funding from The Australian Netball Association.

Using Pulsar TRENDS and TRAC, we’ll be analysing the major concerns for audiences, how particular figures are fuelling debate, which media outlets and teams are most present in the discussion, and why understanding audiences can help sponsors, teams and other sports & sponsorship stakeholders  stay off the bench and get into the game. 

In this case, Netball threw the spotlight onto the sponsorship conversation. And the topic may be under a global spotlight leading into next year’s Netball World Cup. 

As news about Hancock Prospecting’s sponsorship pull broke, and amid Donnell Wallam’s stance on historical comments by Gina Rinehart father (the founder of Hancock Prospecting), social media platforms became the arena for debate on this topic. Leading figures such as Independent Senator David Pocock were quick to make their opinions known in the piece and this quickly raised debate on the suitability of other sponsorships, such as energy company Woodside.

 

 

Sports teams are more than just a uniform

As social media becomes an increasingly important space for the sports business, players, teams and sponsors are having to come to terms with the fact that values and ethical positions are being scrutinised and discussed by fans online.

Across online platforms, audiences are talking about fairness, integrity, ethics, credibility, team-building and inclusion. Teams are expected to act like teams—not only should they look out for each other, but also look out for the wider external community.

 

 

These narratives evolve as time goes on – providing more ground for external audiences to comment.

In this instance, government departments were held accountable, especially when Visit Victoria entered a partnership with Australia Diamonds in response to the sponsorship controversy with Hancock and Gina Rinehart. Disgruntled Australians are showing frustration towards the Victorian Government for committing $15 million of taxpayer money to this sponsorship, but some are justifying the value.

 

 

Online spaces provide room for varying perspectives, whether that’s rationalising Hancock Prospecting’s decision to pull funding or else defending the position Gina Rinehart finds herself in. Other fans focus on Rinehart’s lack of response to her father’s previous comments on Indigenous peoples

No Sport Left Unturned

Netball may have been the triggering sport for this reaction in Australia, but it’s no longer the only sport with its sponsorships up for public review. Over the course of October and November, other sports like Cricket and AFL became embroiled in conversations around their sponsorships.

But all conversation is not equal, and equally concerning for sports stakeholders.

By breaking down the sentiment around this conversation, we’re able to see that sadness dominates this topic - with people disappointed that a beloved national sport could have thrown away a lifeline with their handling of the Hancock Prospecting deal. The conversation also plays host to instances of joy, however, as some fan communities applaud the conviction of the players and Netball Australia for standing by them.

The topic of sport - and questions surrounding what sports represent to the national population - has activated a variety of discussions about the Australian Government, Australia’s wealth and energy. Noticeable themes are emphasised by breaking this conversational network down into topic segments:

  Unpacking the scrimmage

 

Charitable donations and funding, along with the use of government budgets and subsidies to fossil fuel companies, are amongst the main issues highlighted. Calls are being made for the Australian Government to have less reliance on fossil fuels and their representatives. Organisations are now being encouraged to draw up ethical sponsorship policies.

 

 

Companies to Watch in the Sport Sponsorship Debate

Since early October, sponsorships with companies that have seen reputation damage have come under intense scrutiny. Different sponsors emerge from early October through to early November and remain consistent within online media coverage.

Just because Hancock Prospecting and netball have taken the majority share of this conversation doesn’t mean that other sports and their sponsorships are ignored, even within those same media items.

Fossil fuel companies as a whole are all being brought into the debate.

Using Pulsar’s comprehensive audience intelligence capabilities, even the smallest drop in the ocean is picked up before it becomes a tidal wave of media commentary vitriol. Even though Adani mining changed its name to Bravus, they can’t fly under the radar as this topic has surfaced; their sponsorship of NRL’s North Queensland Cowboys, although a small mention, is questioned on Twitter.

 

Sporting events are not alone either; arts goers are pressuring these companies to pull sponsorship partnerships.

 

 

Zooming in on active communities within the media conversation, we can see that news preferences are linked to the perception of the debate as a whole.

Compassionate Social Justice Gen-xers who share an affinity for left-leaning news, arts and culture tend to engage with and follow political commentary. Still, their radio and tv watching tastes blend slightly with the younger Educated Hipsters group. This group, primarily made-up of millennials, have a distinct affinity for climate change activism and education.

Young Sporty Self-starters are less politically inclined and more focused on the love of the sport.

Presented on the outskirts of the engaged online communities are the Conservative Rationalising Gen-xers who believe the value of these sponsorships are nothing to be snubbed at, especially if it’s to make a political statement. This group tends to consume right-leaning media and news.

Media outlets guiding the debate

As trending behaviour shows, this debate was news led and has found invested communities and individuals online willing to engage with it. The ABC is the front-runner for reporting on this topic, but what might be surprising is the prevalence of Western Australian news outlets (WA Today, Perth Now and The West Australian ) appearing in this line-up. However, Western Australia’s economy relies on and has a vested interest in the mining sector.

Leading Influencers across Twitter are industry experts on ending substance abuse (Professor Matthew Rimmer), former sports stars with high community profiles (David Pocock) and climate activists like Davide Bleakley.

Their knowledge, credentials and relevant experiences help validate their point of view. 

 

 

As any fan knows, sports and emotions are tightly interlinked. So it's no surprise that, during these very polarised times, sponsors are also under scrutiny.

Sponsors gain from exposure, but have to accept that debates surrounding their brand will be brought into the public discourse. Likewise, teams can benefit financially from sponsors, but can also alienate fans by becoming embroiled in emotive debates.

To stay up to date with our latest insights and releases, sign up to our newsletter below:



This article was created using data from TRAC

Spotlight