Iran vs the London Olympic Logo: When Should You Respond to False Attacks?

One of the most vexing questions facing communicators is how to respond to increasingly sophisticated attacks from media-savvy opponents who understand the symbolic value of criticism to further their own frequently unrelated goals. The challenge is that the attack is often shaped in such a way that simply by responding, the victim organization gives credibility to the charge. The variety of channels through which such charges can be mounted makes the equation even more difficult because the degree to which a story will go viral is tough to predict with any degree of accuracy.

In the cases of Iran's charge that the London Olympic logo spells 'Zion,' which they claim to be a surreptitious insult to Islam or Muammar Ghaddafi's charge that Nestle has poisoned his citizens, the victimized entities understand that they are dealing with ruthless, opportunistic opponents who are using a patently false charge about their logo or product to further political aims not directly tied to the alleged affront. In the case of Iran it is to discredit the games and gain leverage in anticipation of future demands as well as to distract western journalists from the harsh crackdown being carried out against Iranian dissidents. In the Libyan dictator's case, the reasons may not even be tied to reality, but one can imagine that the uses of deflection or distraction against prominent European critics while a virtual civil war is being fought could be the impetus.

The response - or lack thereof - in each case have been different for specific reasons. Michael Sebastian addresses the issues in Ragan's Daily:

"When do you respond?

That question is on the minds of many corporate communicators—every day. What’s the threshold of YouTube views, negative tweets, blogs comments, and so on, before a company weighs in?

The London Olympics and Nestlé have another threshold to consider: At what point do they respond to taunts from Mideast heads of state?

In a televised address last week, Col. Muammar Gaddafi, the leader of Libya, blamed the uprisings in his nation on Osama bin Laden, claiming the terrorist fed Libyan teenagers hallucinogenic drugs in their milk and Nescafé.

Nestlé, which owns Nescafé, has not responded to the allegation, according to our review of its online newsroom.

A numbers game

On Monday, Iran threatened to boycott the 2012 London Olympics, claiming the game’s official logo resembles the word “Zion,” a Biblical term for Jerusalem.

Here’s what Yahoo Sports had to say about the allegation:


“Iran lecturing the IOC on commitment to sporting values and principles is laughable. This is the same nation that's refused to send athletes to compete against Israelis for the past three decades. Complain about the logo all you want, but stop with the false piety.”


It’s also one way to distract your nation from the revolutions sweeping the Middle East.

In this case, the International Olympic Committee did respond. A spokesperson said, “Our response is as follows: The London 2012 logo represents the figure 2012, nothing else,” according to Yahoo.