Drugs and sports marketing - Literature review Example

?Drugs and sports marketing This article investigates the relationship of drugs and drug-use with sports marketing according to the existing literature on the subject. There are two important findings in this investigation. First, sports culture is responsible for the persistence of drug-use in the sports industry. Secondly, the issues associated with drugs negatively affect sports and athletes public image, making the specific relationship between drugs and sports marketing, primarily a branding and public relations dilemma. There are many reasons why drugs are used in sports. Mottram (2011) summarized the fundamental reasons into four, namely: 1) for legitimate therapeutic use (prescription drug or self-medication); 2) performance continuation (treatment of sports injuries); 3) recreational/social use (legal and illegal); 4) performance enhancement. (p16) These classifications underscore the sheer expanse of the coverage of drug-use in sports and one may be sure the industry that supplies the requirements is lucrative as well. The extant literature on this theme – drugs and sports marketing – is equally expansive and comprehensive owing to this particular aspect in addition to the degree of attention it receives. Sports is a popular form of entertainment today. These two variables combined demonstrate how drugs and its use affect the public image of sports and in the process illustrate to how it is perceived and, hence, marketed to its public. The following sections outline the key issues of this topic in the body of literature. These issues include: the ban/restrictions on drug use based on ethical and moral considerations alone; the fairness of performance-enhancing drugs in competition; and how drugs negatively affect the public image of sports. Key Issues Balancing Act Many observers and scholars underscore that it is imperative to distinguish the use of drugs in sports as Mottram had previously done. The reason behind this lies in the way drugs are perceived by both policymakers and the public that patronize the sports industry. There are several studies that argue how the negative connotation of drug-use often put athletes and sporting bodies in dangerous disadvantage. For example, Fost (1986) cited the classic case of Rick DeMont, an American long-distance swimmer, who had to give up his Olympic gold because it was discovered that before the competition, he took a routine antiasthmatic medications which contained ephedrine – a prohibited substance. (p5) The idea, with DeMont’s example, is that if the aversion to drugs is misplaced, it could become unjust to the athletes themselves. This is also true with regards to the way the private lives of athletes are scrutinized and dragged in the way sports are regulated. This is represented by the constant debate with regards to the addition of recreational drugs as part of the restrictions in the International Olympic Committee’s drug-testing requirements. Schneider and Butcher (2001), commenting on marijuana use by athletes, stressed: The IOC has no good grounds for including marijuana on a restricted list, or for testing for its use. The mandate of the IOC for drug testing is to ensure that athletes compete fairly… Some people might argue that the use of marijuana is illegal (and perhaps also immoral) and so the IOC is justified in testing for its use. But what possible grounds are there for suggesting that the IOC has a role in enforcing the law? (p132) The difficulty for marketing here is how to reconcile the ethical and the practical needs of the stakeholders. A crucial position in this case is how many researchers find athletes as role models for individuals especially for young people. For instance, Martin and Bush’s (2000) findings - in their investigation on the role models for teenagers today - placed athletes on equal footing with direct role models, the parents as well as their favorite entertainers. (p441) Waddington, argued that drugs connote - in the perspective of the wider public – a large number of anti-social activities such as crime and delinquency that its very concept has been contaminated drawing adverse public attitudes and dragging anything or anyone associated with it down the drain. (p112) These variables are underscored by the fact that some drugs that do not affect athletes’ performance, hence are irrelevant to the desire to keep fairness in the field, are banned nonetheless because they offend the sentiments and values held by the society. Essentially, when the general public expects their sports figures to lead “clean” and drug-free lives, sporting bodies follow because the public is their life-blood. The dilemma, hence, for sports marketers is how to communicate the need for certain drugs to be permitted and separating them from negative connotations associated with dope for example. Enhancing Performance The use of performance-enhancing drugs is one of the most important issues in drugs and sports marketing today. This is explained best by Wilson and Derse (2001) in their investigation of the sporting activities in Australia. They found that the country’s swimmers sent to compete in the Olympics are regarded by Australians as clean and untarnished in comparison with its foreign competitors: “The identification of foreign drug cheats contrasted against clean Australian athletes reduces the relationship to a binary arrangement that revolves around the concept of “natural” versus “unnatural” bodies.” (p195) This image is an important dimension to the way sports affects the collective psyche of the nation. The issue revolves around the use of performance enhancing drugs, legitimacy and fairness in sporting activities. Donald (1988) summed up the Australian point of view when he explained that drug-use involves a violation of the human body, that by modifying and manipulating it in order to improve performance, it threatens the integrity of the athletic body, the sporting body and the laws that govern it. (p36) Australians are proud of their athletes and they would be quick to put them forward if one would ask for the best representation of their identity. The use of performance-enhancing drugs has been depicted by much research as an almost inevitable phenomenon because it is a consequence of many athletes’ desire to win. For instance, Coakley and Hughes pointed to Harold Connelly’s testimony before a US Senate committee back in 1973 wherein he declared that almost all athletes “would do anything and take anything, short of killing themselves to improve athletic performance.” (cited in Waddington 2000, p116) This theme has already been extensively explained in Coakley and Hughes’ earlier work, wherein they stated that: Other evidences suggest that this willingness to do anything and take anything exists among both men and women in capitalist and socialist, industrial and pre-industrial societies… If today’s drugs had been available in the year 300, 1600, or 1800, they would have probably been used to the same extent they are used by athletes [today]. (Coakley and Hughes 1994, p151) Steroid-use is at the center of the debate on performance-enhancing drugs. Bahrke and Yesalis (2004) in their discourse of the drug’s effects explained that it is used as an artificial derivative of testosterone, used to enhance athletic performance. (p1) In a research and experiment conducted by Bhasin et al. (1996), it was found that “supraphysiologic doses of testosterone, especially when combined with strength training, increase fat-free mass and muscle size and strength in normal men.” (p. 1) Taylor and Wilson (2005) outlined several cases that demonstrate the efficacy of this drug to induce enhanced performance. They cited Mark McGwire, the baseball player admitted using steroids during the 1998 major league baseball season. Through this example they cited thin the process, they were able to identify the scientifically proven effects that could empower athletes to augment their performances: The elevation of blood testosterone levels in both males and females that increase their lean body mass and physical strength; The suppression of the body’s natural production of testosterone by the hypothalamus and the pituitary gland. (Taylor and Wilson, p235) The above findings have been underscored by McGwire’s 1998 major league performance performances, when he broke the single-season record by hitting 70 home runs. (Taylor & Wilson, p235) On this note, Hendelsman (2006) warned that a vision of the consequences of removing the WADA doping control regime is provided by the rampant androgen abuse in US baseball and football – national sports that provide sufficient fame and fortune without an international dimension so they remain outside WADA jurisdiction. (p438) Waddington and Smith, in their research, cited the fundamental reason behind the opposition to the use of performance-enhancing drugs as they pointed to the criteria set by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) – the organization that regulates drug use in sports. WADA stressed that the use of drugs is harmful to the image of sport because it defeats the spirit of fairness in competition. (Waddington & Smith, p45) In Sterngrass’ (2010) own research devoted exclusively to steroids use, he argued that sports fans and the general public tend to be more offended than athletes. The reason for this is that the use of performance-enhancing drugs gives some athletes an unfair advantage and, in the process, corrupts the intended purpose of sports or makes a sport easier that it had been in times gone by. (Sterngrass, p9) In addition to this, there are also critics who raise the harmful effect of drugs and substances on athletes health, which supposedly is a sufficient reason, by itself, in order for the drugs to be banned. Still, there are those who argue against banning a number of drugs such as the performance enhancing medication steroid. Boxill (2003) is one of these academics, who stressed that there are many fatal flaws in the arguments against its use. He represented those oppositionists by stating that the harm, which is one of the most persuasive argument against steroids so far, does not result from one player doing something to another within the constitutive rules of the game: “steroids have nothing to do with defining the sport itself, so a ban on drugs in sports cannot be a part of the constitutive rules.” (p183) Boxill’s idea is that constitutive rules must be distinguished from regulative rules, which for its part, are instituted in order to promote safe play and fairness. (p183) His reasoning is that steroids or some performance-inducing drug is not part of the play itself nor it is an intrinsic feature of any sport that is why the dangers or harms associated with steroids really do not have anything to do with the constitutive rules of the game. (p183) Sports and Identity The relationship of drug-use and sports is also reinforced, according to Wilson and Derse, by the idea that sports and athletes are identified with nation and its people, symbolizing their spirit as well as their aspirations and dreams. To highlight this, they cited the Australian experience with the popular Kieren Perkins, a professional swimmer: Perkins epitomizes the Australian who lives in so many of our hearts. He is the face of Australia. Kieren is the Australian we want to hang on to. The Australian so many of us admire. Kieren made me feel not only extremely proud to be an Australian. Kieren Perkins made me feel both privileged and proud to have an Australian of his caliber out there representing me. If the world is going to see what an Australian is like, if there is a picture of an Australian we’d like shown around the globe, Kieren Perkins represents that Image. (Ironbark Legends 1997) Maguire and Tuck’s (1998) investigation of rugby in the United Kingdom also supported the claim about sports link with national identity when they found that the development of this sport increasingly became an indicator of national culture, politics and identity of Britain from 1945 onwards. (p124) Drugs and Sports Public Image What the previously cited issues collectively demonstrated is that drugs and drug-use effectively tarnish the image of sports or that it has a negative connotation, enough to harm any sports marketing initiative. First, there is the fact that drugs are equated with crime and other negative connotations that repel public perception and sentiments. This is aggravated by the fact that sports personalities are considered role models by many people, making their actions and lives subject to imitations by their followers, especially the young population. Hendelson offered a depiction of this case by detailing the following scenario involving anabolic substance abuse: From the epicenter of drug cheating in sport, androgen abuse has diffused to the wider community, where it has become an entrenched modality of drug abuse, predominantly a masculine form of cosmetic consumerism appealing to narcissistic, body building subculture. (p438) The previously cited factors underscore the existence of several variables and stakeholders. First, there is the commercialization of sports, characterized by athletes finding lucrative careers and huge financial rewards. Then, there is the degree of competition that emerged out of this commercialization. This forces athletes to resort to drug use and abuse so that they can boost performance and gain competitive advantage. They reinforce many athletes’ desire to win. The sporting bodies and agencies are wedged within the center of this commercialization phenomenon because they tend to benefit immensely in sports management. According to De Montfort (1998), from the perspective of the commercialization argument, sports goods and services can be considered as commodities that are affected by market forces in addition to the way sports organizations are treated as the purveyors of rationality while that organizations that manage them are crucial in the welfare of all the stakeholders involved as well as the direction of the sports industry. (De Montfort) After commercialization and athletes and sports organization, there are the fans and the general public who patronize sports and, as the previous review of literature demonstrated, tend to imitate and be easily influenced by sporting figures and personalities. Finally, there are the wider public, the community and policy networks that clamor for regulations as questions on ethics, morality, health safety and fairness are constantly being raised with drug use in the industry. Together, they constitute a very complicated environment that challenges marketers immensely today and in the future. Future Prospects and Recommendations The academic research on the subject is dominated by those that acknowledge how drugs in sports is a controversial and timely issue that sparks a continuing debate in all public fora. People’s interest is magnified by the fact that sports and athletes occupy an important position in popular and modern culture. This is interesting according to Douvis (1998) because the future of sports will increasingly be defined by the fans and the public in general, especially with the fact that the consumers spend billions of money ($320 billion in the US) on sports events and activities. This can be demonstrated in the way sports are now highly segmented, which is seen to continue in the future and beyond, owing to the fact that consumers are becoming more complex in their needs as well as in their demographic makeup and ultimately evolving into segments. (Douvis) This issue is also going to be defined by the way sporting bodies will wield power in the future. According to Gladden, Irwin and Sutton (2001) corporate involvement will continue to increase and as a result, there would be a rapid escalation of franchise values – all contributing to the changes in the way teams and athletes will be viewed and managed in the future. (p301) Another important area that appears to be emerging is the way sports marketing is developing as a discipline. With the discourse on drugs, the social underpinnings of the field is slowly allowing sports marketing an identity of its own. In addition, the degree of attention that academics and scholars devote to sports marketing, as with the subject of this paper – drugs in sports marketing – it reflects a sustained interest that is rapidly paving the way for the establishment of a more formal and comprehensive field that could promise a more specialized discipline if all the current problems and issues it faces would be solved and addressed. There are already several scholarly works, wrote Douvis that could prove helpful in establishing a sound and strong foundation and framework for sports marketing. Drug use and the sociological dimensions to it as discussed by this paper, had revealed several approaches and models that can be used to explain the behavior of athletes, sports organizations with regards to drugs and its effect on sports marketing as well as sports marketing in general. For example, Smith et al. (2010), has investigated the influences and ecological factors about why drugs persists in the sporting world. They found, that athletes’ attitudinal behavior towards drugs has been shaped by the sports culture itself. (p198) The implication of this finding is that sports culture is a unique and powerful force that will shape the way sports goods and services are traded in the market. Shermer (2008), for his part, has explained how game theory came to explain the persistence of drug-use in sports. This model - one which investigates how players choose their strategies that will yield the best returns in anticipation of the strategies that would be employed other players - is an excellent approach to understanding sports, athletes and their mindsets in the context of sports marketing because it provides in-depth insights on the pervasive sports environment shape trends, and athletes’ and organizational behaviors. There is also Mitchell and Imrie’s (2011) work on the so-called tribe consumers, which could actually define the characteristics of sports consumers, particularly demonstrating how loyalty could translate to specific and certain marketing value. Again, the dynamics behind the relationship between drugs or the use of it and sports marketing has revealed an antagonistic public mind – that which is averse to any scandal or morally and ethically wrong action and behavior. This is the reason why many marketers themselves foresee that the field of branding in sports marketing could have a lot of challenges and potentials as well. For this purpose, Schwarz and Hunter (2008) developed their so-called sport brand architecture, which stresses sports marketers to work with sport entities in order build a brand structure and architecture that focuses on communicating the value the sport entity is creating, as well as the resultant benefits of the sport product as viewed by the sport consumer. (p365) In addition, Douvis predicted that sport marketers will further build on previous studies from the field of general marketing and advertising research but will modify them according to the evolving trends facing the sports industry. It is in this respect wherein the issue of drugs and drug use is particularly helpful. The potency and potentials of the sports brands highlight Duguid’s (2004) position that the success of sports marketing in the future rests on integrity. (p20) The collective wisdom of the body of literature with regards to its prediction about the future of sports marketing entailed the necessary admonition to follow and build on the expected trend and the use of posited models and strategies as presented by several experts. Most importantly, however, especially in the context of the key issues outlined by this paper, there is the need to pursue and refine the kind of branding model to be used and the need to avoid tainting the public image of the sport products or goods. Horrow and Swatek (2010) stressed that when individual athletes are tainted by scandal or alleged drug use, it can also ruin reputation, and appeal as a marketing platform, of the event in which they’re competing. (p185) That is why the authors recommend risk avoidance at all cost. This is particularly important because of the advances in communications technology today that makes it possible for the activities of sports personalities to be known at a blink of an eye. With the speed by which information are disseminated and accessed, sports brands can be built and torn down overnight. Personal Insights With the issue of drugs and drug use, it is easy to understand how sports marketing is not really that different with the general marketing discipline. The standard marketing principles and models are applicable to this field as well. It has been established for instance, that the sports goods and services are commodities that are being traded in the market, hence, are subject to the forces that characterize its movements. Moreover, past research on branding such as those undertaken by Sujan and Bettman (1989) underscore how consumers maintain schemas for individual brand names. This is true in the case of an athlete. Today, he can be considered a brand by himself and that the marketing principle at work in this circumstance calls for a certain congruity of his image and his actions/behavior even his personal life. This is highlighted by the way many athletes’ reputation became tainted with drug use and were, as a consequence, prevented from getting enlisted by big sporting companies for endorsement deals. And this is the same with sporting bodies and teams as well. When Stefano Garzelli, for instance, tested positive for a masking agent during the Tour de France doping scandal, it was widely believed that his team, Mapei, terminated his sponsorship immediately. The very factor that drives a wedge between the image and the appropriate behavior/action from an athlete or a sporting body is the very same risk that Horrow and Swatek have warned sports marketers to avoid. Meanwhile, with regards to the review of the existing literature, there is an abundance of materials on sports marketing owing to the fact that sports is, unarguably, an established and popular game in the West already. While drug use in sports, for its part, has also claimed significant interest from scholars and academics, their relationship – sports marketing and drugs – has not attracted the same degree of interest or that such specific relationship has not yet achieved prominence among academics and researchers. The fact is that there is a dearth of published references that tackle the role of drugs and drug in sports marketing. There are, of course, some sources that discussed the subject but most of these were studies and research undertaken on different and more general topics. In addition, a number of available literature as demonstrated by some cited in this paper are too technical and scientific. This is an area that is very promising to pursue given the fact that many companies and organizations turn to athletes today in building and augmenting their own brands. This should underscore the power that the athlete as a brand wields. It would be interesting to investigate their impact on brand building and product development with the variable of drug use thrown in the mix. References Bahrke, M and Yesalis, C 2004, “Abuse of anabolic androgenic steroids and related substances in sport and exercise.” Current Opinion in Pharmacology, vol. 4, no. 6, pp. 614-620. Bhasin, S, Storer, T, Berrman, N, Callegari, C, Clevenger, B, Phillips, J, Bunnell, T, Tricker, R, Shirazi, A, and Casaburi, R 1996, “Abuse of anabolic androgenic steroids and related substances in sport and exercise.” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 336, no. 1, pp. 1-7. Boxill, J 2003, Sports ethics: an anthology. Wiley-Blackwell, Malden, MA. Coakley, J and Hughes, R 1994, "Deviance in Sports," in J. Coakley's Sport in Society: Issues and Controversies 5th ed. Mosby, St. Louis, MO. De Montfort, T 1998, Studying the commercialization of sport: The need for critical analysis. Sociology of Sport. Donald, J 1988 “How English is it?” New Foundations vol. 6, pp. 31-47. Douvis, J 1998, "A review of the research areas in the field of sport marketing: Foundations, current trends, future directions." Cyber-Journal of Sport Marketing. Available from: http://fulltext.ausport.gov.au/fulltext/2000/cjsm/v4n2-3/douvis43.htm.. [15 April 2011]. Duguid, S 2004, "Are brands complicit in sport's doping scandal?" Asia's Media & Marketing Newspaper. January 2004, pp. 20. Fost, N 1986, "Banning Drugs in Sport: A Skeptical View." The Hastings Center Report, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 5-8. Gladden, J, Irwin, R and Sutton, W 2001, "Managing North American Major Professional Sports Teams in the New Millennium: A Focus on Building Brand Equity." Journal of Sport Management, vol. 15, pp. 297-317. Hendelsman, D 2006, "Testosterone: use, misuse and abuse." MJA, vol. 185, no. 8, pp. 436-439. Horrow, R and Swatek, K 2010, Beyond the Box Score: An Insider's Guide to the $750 Billion Business of Sports. New York: Wordclay. Ironbark Legends 1997, Kieren Perkins. Melbourne: Macmillan. Maguire, J and Tuck, J 1998, "Global sports and patriot games: Rugby union and national identity in a United sporting Kingdom since 1945." Frank Cass. vol. 9, pp. 103-126. Martin, C and Bush, A 2000, "Do role models influence teenagers’ purchase intentions and behavior," Journal of Consumer Marketing, vol. 17, vol. 5, pp. 441-453. Mitchell, C and Imrie, B 2011, "Consumer tribes: membership, consumption and building loyalty." Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics. vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 39-56. Mottram, D 2011, Drugs in Sport. New York: Taylor & Francis. Schneider, A and Butcher, R 2001, An ethical analysis of drug testing. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Schwarz, E and Hunter, J 2008, Advanced theory and practice in sport marketing. Advanced theory and practice in sport marketing. San Diego, CA: Butterworth-Heinemann. Shermer, M 2008, "The Doping Dilemma." Scientific American. vol. 298, no. 4, Smith, A, Stewart, B, Oliver-Bennetts, S, McDonald, S, Ingerson, L, Anderson, A, Dickson, G, Emery, P and Graetz, F 2010. "Contextual influences and athlete attitudes to drugs in sport." Sport Management Review. vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 181-197. Sterngrass, J 2010, Steroids. New York: Marshall Cavendish. Sujan, M and Bettman, J 1989, "The effects of brand positioning strategies on consumers' brand and category perceptions: Some insights from schema research." Journal of Marketing Research. vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 454-467. Taylor, J and Wilson, G 2005, Applying sport psychology: four perspectives. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Waddington, I 2000, Sport, health and drugs: a critical sociological perspective. New York: Taylor & Francis. Waddington, I. and Smith, A. (2009). An introduction to drugs in sport: addicted to winning? New York: Taylor & Francis. Wilson, W and Derse, E 2001, Doping in elite sport: the politics of drugs in the Olympic movement. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Read More