The Olympic Games are usually a big deal for marketing. Businesses worldwide spend more money on advertising when the Olympics are happening. Official sponsors and other companies that want to get in on the action use the Olympic logo, specific sports, national teams, or athletes to promote their products. Big global brands think the Olympics and World Cup soccer are the most important international sports events. Being linked to these events can make people know and like a brand more, and it can even help sell more stuff compared to brands that don't sponsor the Olympics.

But this year, things are a bit different. Some people are worried about China hosting the Olympics because of how the Chinese government has been involved in issues like Tibet and Sudan, which are related to human rights. This might make the Olympics not as fun, especially for fans, athletes, and the companies that sponsor the Games.

For example, there's Lenovo, a big computer company from China. They've spent around $100 million to sponsor the Olympics. They, along with Samsung and Coca-Cola, paid a lot to be part of the torch relay. This will probably help Lenovo sell more computers in China. But outside of China, Lenovo doesn't want to be seen only as a Chinese company, especially if people start boycotting Chinese products.

Here are some trends I’m seeing among sponsoring companies:

First-time sponsors have a lot more to lose than long-term investors.

Lenovo, as a first-time global sponsor whose future depends heavily on success this year, has much more at stake than veteran Olympics sponsors such as Coca-Cola, Visa and McDonald’s. These companies are long-term investors in the Olympics; if Beijing fails to realize earlier commercial expectations, London in 2012 can make up for it. Around the world, the veteran sponsors may be careful not to over-identify with Beijing. They will emphasize sponsorships of national athletes and national teams rather than focus on the Olympic rings. But, in China, the Western multinationals will pursue a much more aggressive strategy. They will build goodwill for their brands by creating China-specific advertising and promotion programs that tap Chinese pride in hosting the Games.

“Two-faced” approaches.

Those companies that are not global sponsors of the Games will also take a two-faced approach, supporting the Games in China while being disinclined to associate with them in North American and European markets. Given the prominence of China as a supplier and customer, it is unlikely that we will witness grandstanding boycotts of the Games by any company. Most consumers around the world do not let their political views affect their purchase decisions. However, we are likely to see websites promoting boycotts of Chinese brands such as Haier, TCL and Lenovo.

Late campaign purchasing as a safety hedge.

The International Olympic Committee continues to argue that the Games and the aspirations and achievements of individual athletes should be independent of politics. The reality is that the Chinese government has always intended to use the Games to its political advantage and that further escalations of violence in Tibet could diminish public support and lead to national team and individual athlete boycotts, as occurred in Moscow following the Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan. As a result, marketers are not over-committing funds to Olympics-related brand advertising and promotions and the normal Olympics year advertising boost may be less than expected. Instead of longterm preset media advertising buys, many companies are planning short-term promotional bursts that they can activate as late as July and August if all appears to be in place for a successful, trouble-free Games.