Controversy surrounding tennis star Maria Sharapova illustrates the difficulty brands often face with celebrity endorsements.
Sharapova admitted she tested positive for the drug meldonium, a medication the World Anti-Doping Agency only recently banned. The International Tennis Association banned the tennis star pending an investigation. Last year, Sharapova earned more money from endorsements than Serena Williams, the top-rated player on the women’s circuit.
Nike and Porsche announced it would suspend – but not terminate — their relationships with Sharapova while the investigation proceeds. Other brands, such Danone and Avon, were more taciturn about their endorsement contracts, but may take similar actions.
A Complex Issue
The case is not clear-cut. It’s not certain if the tennis star was taking the medication strictly for her health or to enhance her athletic performance.
Meldonium is designed to treat chronic heart failure. It is not approved by the FDA or available in the U.S, according to Wikipedia. It can also improve patients’ moods and make them become more active. Sharapova said she began taking the drug for a magnesium deficiency and irregular EKGs, which can signal problems with the heart’s electrical activity, according to CNNMoney.
“This is an unusual situation for a celebrity endorser because there are mitigating circumstances,” Bob Williams, chief executive of Burns Entertainment & Sports Marketing, told The Wall Street Journal. “Whether or not there are enough mitigating circumstances to conclude that this is really about her health and not about enhancing her performance…that’s the crux of the issue.”
Image Risks of Waiting
The wait-and-see approach carries risks for her sponsors, marketing experts say. Brands have their images on the line. “If brands act too quickly, they might throw out a good relationship that’s been beneficial to the brand,” Allen Adamson, founder of Brand Simple Consulting, told the Journal. “But if they’re not fast enough, they may be seen as not authentic and not having a backbone.”
Nike in particular may be feeling a sense of deja vu. In the past, Nike dropped Oscar Pistorius and Lance Armstrong after scandals. Most recently, the sportswear maker cut ties with boxing champion Manny Pacquiao after he made offensive comments about gay people. However, Nike stuck with golf star Tiger Woods after he confessed to infidelity.
Sharapova’s PR Challenge
As a celebrity brand, Sharapova acted as large brands might in attempting to manage a PR crisis. She humbly apologized and took full responsibility for not checking the banned list.
By making a case that she made an honest mistake, Sharapova could recover from the career crisis. Other celebrities have mended their image after scandals.
If Sharapova receives only a short suspension and is then allowed to play in tournaments, winning on the court may be the best solution to the image crisis. “Being good at sports and winning heals all wounds,” Whitney Wagoner, director of the University of Oregon’s Warsaw Sports Marketing Center, told NBC News. “We build up athletes to be perfect icons. We are then happy to see them screw up and love going through the thorny details. But eventually we want to see them rise up and come back from adversity. Coming back and being a champion is what the public wants.”
Bottom Line: The Maria Sharapova controversy shows the difficult decisions brands face when a celebrity lands in hot water. Should they drop the celebrity like a hot potato or stick with them and risk damaging their image?
What advice would you give to Sharapova and her sponsors on handling this crisis going forward? Please comment below.
William J. Comcowich founded and served as CEO of CyberAlert LLC, the predecessor of Glean.info. He is currently serving as Interim CEO and member of the Board of Directors. Glean.info provides customized media monitoring, media measurement and analytics solutions across all types of traditional and social media.
