Skip to content or view screen version

Olympic Spirit? Oxford residents reject Coca-Cola's hijacking of Torch Relay

tom | 09.07.2012 13:33 | Oxford

On the day that the Olympic torch arrives in Oxford slogans appeared in shops and Bill Boards along the route highlighting the human rights abuses of Coca-Cola. Signs in shop windows read Killercoke.org directing readers to a website that details the string of human-rights abuses around the world that Coca-Cola is accused of

On the day that the Olympic torch arrives in Oxford slogans appeared in shops and Bill Boards along the route highlighting the human rights abuses of Coca-Cola. Signs in shop windows read Killercoke.org directing readers to a website that details the string of human-rights abuses around the world that Coca-Cola is accused of.

Tom Simpson of the Cowley road said “Local people were obviously so outraged by the sea of coca-cola advertising that appeared on the Cowley Road they wanted to show that a huge company can't just buy it's way into people's community. The true values of the Olympics - those of respect,excellence and fairplay- are the opposite of what a large human-rights abusing organisation like Coca-Cola symbolises.

Previously residents and community leaders have also criticised plans by Coca-Cola to fly over 22 Americans to carry the Olympic torch in Oxfordshire rather than choose community participants.

Tom went on to say “I've spoken with families who are appalled by the idea that a world sporting event like this can be hijacked by such an unhealthy drink with such a bad track record around the world – it completely contradicts what the event is about. I hope these messages send a clear message to the organisers of this event and others like it, people want to get into the spirit of an event but not one that is a way of force-feeding advertising upon us. “

tom
- Homepage: killercoke.org

Comments

Hide the following 13 comments

No coincidance

09.07.2012 15:49

Oxford is a posh area. Urgo hatred of large companies that appeal to the common people.

Dan Factor


no coincidence taken

09.07.2012 17:24

Yeah, everyone in Oxford is posh (even those that hit the multiple deprivation indices, ie are poor) and everyone in Dan Factor is a class warrior and Coca-Cola stand up for the common people. Good analysis.

Analyse This


not posh round here

09.07.2012 18:12

FYI Cowley Road is in East Oxford and is not posh, it's the road that leads from the city centre to the car plant and has always been the working class area of Oxford.

eastender


Torch event today

09.07.2012 19:29

I went out of curiosity and learnt two fantastic things:
1.That the Save Temple Swimming Pool struggle is still ongoing  http://tiny.cc/savetcp
2.That one of the sponsers of the olympics are nasty company called coca cola who not only produce beverages which are unhealthy if drunk, polute the environment and have been known to shoot and kill their employees who stand up to them! but that there are local people are willing to make a stand and try to educate the rest us us and boycott coke.  http://killercoke.org/

bystander
- Homepage: http://killercoke.org/ http://tiny.cc/savetcp


this article may not be accurate

09.07.2012 21:25

This article claims that "slogans appeared in shops and Bill Boards along the route highlighting the human rights abuses of Coca-Cola".

If they did they weren't placed very noticably. I came down Cowley Rd just before the relay and didn't see any.

As someone who was involved with a small protest that did actually happen in Oxford:
 http://oxford.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/oxford/2012/07/497796.html
...I can say that the only people I know organising on these issues in the run up to the relay did not have time to distribute posters etc on Cowley Rd, and have no idea who wrote this article.

Happy to be proved wrong - if anyone can post photos of the billboards and posters mentioned.

Impulsive Clamberer


Coca-Cola unhealthy/Unhealthy sponsors

09.07.2012 21:44

If you drink it everyday yes.

I don't get the whole "this or that company cannot sponsor a sport event like the Olympics because their products are unhealthy and sport is all about health".
The athlets won't be drinking/eating the products so one can only assume the concern for the impact of the sponsorship/advertising on the spectators.
The objectors believe that the ordinary punter who attends events like the Olympics will see slogans and adverts for Coca-Cola and McDonalds around the venues and be compelled to go and buy and consume their products and stuff their faces with junk food and junk drinks.
The whole protest against the world's biggest McDonalds at the Olympics venue has stemed from a belief that the common people attending the event will see a massive McDonalds and will find it almost impossible to not go in there and eat their food.
But people have brains and can make their own minds up.

Dan Factor


@Danny boy

09.07.2012 22:35

I agree with you -- up to a point.........
On the one hand, people are adults and have brains. Its up to them if they want to buy a McDonalds or a coke. It isn't up to the objectors what the public can and can't eat.
The objectors will say "but the people are stupid and can't think for themselves...we have to think for them." The intelligent answer to that is a firm: "fuck off and mind your own business. I don't bitch about you smoking your rollups and drinking your beer so piss off and leave me alone you nosey twat."

On the other hand, companies don't spend money on advertising/sponsorship for fun. They have to justify those costs to the shareholders. They've been in the game long enough to know that X money spent on Y = Z benefits to sales. So yes, more advertising = more people buying McDonalds (but less buying Burger King!?)

But, at the end of the day, they arn't breaking any laws. And nobody put the protestors in charge of these decisions. So i guess things will remain as they are as there is reason that it would be prevented.

Max


@Dan & Max

10.07.2012 09:09

You might want to click on the killercoke link, nothing to do with the diet and 'choice' issues you two are pontificating about (you'd have to wonder why you do it here): trade unionist assassinations in Colombia and groundwater pollution in India are the kinds of 'human rights' abuses alleged.

Isidro Segundo Gil
- Homepage: http://www.colombiasolidarity.org.uk/


Human rights abuses

10.07.2012 15:12

Yes we both have ducked that issue which is of course important and worth highlighting. But the objections are about the product of Coke itself as much as the companies' abuses of human rights.

Dan Factor


pics of killercoke signs and bill board

10.07.2012 16:40

Shop display
Shop display

Bill board
Bill board

Apologies that I didn't get these up sooner (technology problems) but they had gone by midday because Coke employees ripped them down and council workers defaced the billboard. However loads of people saw them and have been talking about them. Amazing how efficient such people are when a corporate sponsor is involved!

For those of you not from Oxford yes there are a load of rich toffs and middle class wannadbees in the city but it also has some of the highest indicators of poverty in the country - scratch the surface and real people exist

PS Apologies if an autonomous group didn't inform others activists of Oxford beforehand but remember we are everywhere even if we don't wear our badges as loudly as some.

tom


nice

10.07.2012 18:13

Like I said, very happy to be proved wrong! Nice work.

Impulsive Clamberer


Why they do it

10.07.2012 18:21

I saw a bit of the olympic torch paraphenalia where I live. What it feels like is certain brands, Coke being the main one, who have the financial muscle to be ubiquitous at all olympic associated events, rather as Mcdonalds signs surrounded the football pitch of every England game at Euro 2012. The image and feel-good factor of these events has the effect of sanitising the sponsors more dubious business practices and health issues with their products.

Sugar gas and water


PS

10.07.2012 18:24

"PS Apologies if an autonomous group didn't inform others activists of Oxford beforehand but remember we are everywhere even if we don't wear our badges as loudly as some."

To explain further, I interpreted the original article as saying that shops had put up anti-Coke posters. Now I realise from the photos it actually meant that shop signs were subverted.

I have no problem believing that there are many autonomous Oxford pixies out there (long may that continue!) I just found it hard to believe that a more public above-ground campaign of getting shops to put up posters would have escaped my notice...

Hope that explains my initial scepticism, and that no offence has been taken?

Impulsive Clamberer