Comments on: Does accepting a sponsor’s money mean you condone or support them?

By: MLDina

MLDina — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 22:26:03 +0000

I think it depends on the depth of the sponsorship. If it was just a banner or sign, raising awareness to the existence of a group is harmless, in my opinion. If the group (political or not), is hosting a main event at a conference, and I was against the cause, I probably wouldn't show up. I don't think I'd skip a show over a banner, though.

By: Vancouver Blogger Gus Greeper » Blog Archive » Northern Voice is a FULL sell out - to the BC Liberals that is

Mon, 09 Feb 2009 21:22:22 +0000

[...] plate I wouldn’t have gone based on principle alone. [posts regarding the dinner: Derek, Jen, Tris & [...]

By: Derek K. Miller

Derek K. Miller — Wed, 04 Feb 2009 23:43:22 +0000

In most cases, whether you're dealing with a political party or not, a sponsor would prefer (or demand) to be the sole sponsor of their type — which is why you don't see both Coke and Pepsi, or both McDonald's and Burger King, sponsoring the Olympics.

Based on comments around the web on this issue, it seems that following the offer from the BC Liberals, the Northern Voice committee asked some of the other parties if they were interested too, and they were not. I'm not sure if that's the reason, but there you go.

By: sillygwailo

sillygwailo — Wed, 04 Feb 2009 21:19:51 +0000

There was a missed setting in the permissions for comments. I've set it so that all legitimate comments should go through now.

(I help administer the site on behalf of NV.)

By: Jon Husband

Jon Husband — Wed, 04 Feb 2009 06:57:05 +0000

What Mack D. Male and Derek Miller said re: reputational influence .. the word sponsorship carries the issue here. There is always some form of exchange with sponsorship, even it is not explicitly visible, that's why there are sponsorship committees, to decide what the best quid pro quo is and why. We live in such an advertising-and-branding saturated word that we have become benumbed or inattentive to the basic issues, and then of course relativism creeps on into the party. But hey, we are supposedly living in a pomo world, right ?

Here's an interesting test .. would the organizing committee have accepted equal sponsorships from both the BC Liberals and the BC NDP, and if so, would each party respectively have been comfortable as co-sponsor ? It would be interesting to find out the answers to those two questions.

By: raincoaster

raincoaster — Wed, 04 Feb 2009 00:05:24 +0000

And, yes, suddenly there are everyone's comments, posted. But it shouldn't have taken a thunderstorm and the better part of a week to get this done, should it?

I also see the link to the Eventbrite listing to purchase tickets for the party right in the post; that is something I looked for, and did not find, earlier. Now that it appears to be sold out, there's hardly any point, is there? The link to purchase tickets was sent out on Twitter, I understand, several days ago and not posted in the blog announcement for several days, thus filtering who would get the information in time to act on it and who would not.

These are social media choices that may perhaps be more telling than the committee would like. While a lot of people are on Twitter, not everyone is, and it's specifically a blogging conference, not a social media one. Perhaps the priorities in this case were backwards.

And, as I said on the NV site, perhaps the solution to this issue is to avoid having parties so extravagant they cannot be staged without the financial support of controversial organizations. They've managed it every year up till now, and last year even managed to host a party big enough for everyone instead of one with the capacity of less than half of attendees.

By: raincoaster

raincoaster — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 12:22:11 +0000

Travis, when are the comments on the Northern Voice blog going to be approved? None of the comments I've ever left on that blog have shown up, including the one I left asking how to purchase tickets for the party. THAT is a negative factor for sure!

By: Travis Smith

Travis Smith — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 10:01:39 +0000

Tris,

Thanks for blogging about this. Here's the organizing committee's take on the situation:

http://2009.northernvoice.ca/blog/reactions-spons...

TTFN
Travis

By: Tris Hussey

Tris Hussey — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 20:30:22 +0000

Derek, Of course you're going to the extreme, but yes it is a point well taken. And I think given how tight things are, the temptation to take money where you can get it will be strong. It's good that we're hashing this all out. Excellent discussion and lots of valid points from all.

By: Tris Hussey

Tris Hussey — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 20:19:33 +0000

Thank you Lola. I agree with your point about political parties, and to some extent companies (I don't order Dominoes Pizza for that reason).

I'm going to the dinner because I feel it will be fun, and maybe I can influence public policy in some way.

By: Tris Hussey

Tris Hussey — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 20:17:23 +0000

For a first go at sponsoring then, they were testing the waters. Now with NorthernVoice they have a better gauge of opinion.

By: Derek K Miller

Derek K Miller — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 19:08:36 +0000

As I posted on Duane's blog, even without influence on the content of the event, there is an influence on its reputation and credibility. If not, then conferences could accept sponsorship from anyone at all — white supremacists, the government of Sudan, organized crime — and say, “There’s no influence! What’s the problem?” No one would say that a legit political party is anything like those organizations, so the reputational influence isn't as obvious, but it's still there.

By: raincoaster

raincoaster — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 08:48:14 +0000

I'd definitely say that a sponsorship deal with a conference is "doing business." Money changes hands in exchange for something, which in this case was indeed a very hands-off branding exercise.

The Liberal support was so unobtrusive as to be nearly invisible; I'm not sure they got their money's worth, if they wanted to raise awareness among attendees, but it will look good to the general public when they send out press releases about their activities. As I've said elsewhere, it's a strategy similiar to the UK Tories, and it's done very well for them among the public, although the tech community still squints and goes "oh, them!"

By: Lola May

Lola May — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 03:25:53 +0000

I think as soon as money changes hands you are sitting in the same camp, whether it's your money you're spending or money you're accepting. If I buy from a company that supports pro-life then I am supporting that political agenda too whether I consciously choose to or not. If you accept money from a company OR a political party, you are affiliated with them, at least in other people's eyes, whether you think so or not. If I see a blog with sponsor logos I always associate the blogger with those organizations. And anytime a blogger posts positively about a product or business I always wonder if they are somehow paid to do so (products, services, or money) – and frankly, if I wanted to read/look at advertising, I'd do it somewhere else instead of a blog. I think people need to look more critically at the information they are exposed to all the time. Who wants dinner paid for by the Liberals? I'd rather they deal with some bigger issues we have (say, like homelessness or the environment).

By: Tris Hussey

Tris Hussey — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 00:18:59 +0000

I think with something as divisive as politics, that even a mild endorsement is too much. However by NOT sending some one to WCW, they did show it was no strings.