Sponsorship of the Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games and the FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022 on X and Instagram: A comparative analysis of digital activation and content type

Guillermo Sanahuja-Peris

Universitat Jaume I de Castellón. Spain

gsanahuj@uji.es 




  

Emilio Fernández-Peña 

Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Spain. 

emilio.fernandez@uab.cat

Magdalena Mut-Camacho

Universitat Jaume I de Castellón. Spain. 

mcamacho@uji.es 

  

 

 

  ABSTRACT

Introduction: The aim of this study was to perform a comparative analysis of the activation of sponsorship of the Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games and FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022 on social media. Methodology: A mixed-method study design was conceived, combining an analysis of the quantitative and qualitative content of posts on the global and Spanish X and Instagram accounts of 16 sponsors. These were International Olympic Committee and Spanish Olympic Committee sponsors, as well as official FIFA World Cup 2022 sponsors. Results: After analysing a sample of 4,791 posts, the results revealed interesting findings regarding the volume of posts about these two mega-events on the one hand, and the thematic types of post on the other. In general terms, it was concluded that the Olympic sponsors had devoted efforts to promoting their links with the Olympic Games, while the FIFA World Cup sponsors had generated a higher number of posts. At the same time, it was found that cross-pollination had only been partially used in the brands’ stories: some did not interconnect their global and national communication strategies, and the brands’ stories on X and Instagram did not match. Conclusions: The most common themes of the activation of both sponsorships were informing and interacting, which stood out much more than other types such as entertaining or rewarding.

 Keywords: social media; sponsorship; activation; X; Instagram; Olympic Games, FIFA World Cup.

1.       INTRODUCTION

1.1. Sponsorship of the Olympic Games and the FIFA World Cup

It could be said that, in the literature on sports sponsorship, the Olympic Games and the FIFA World Cup have been the main focus of attention since the late 1990s (Maldonado-Erazo et al, 2019). In 1984, the IOC – under the presidency of Juan Antonio Samaranch – redesigned its sponsorship offering, creating the TOP sponsorship programme that drastically reduced the number of brands linked to the Olympic event, granting exclusivity and greater image transfer benefits (Fernández Peña, 2016). Alongside the implementation of the programme, which, at the time of writing, had reached its tenth edition, scholars have contributed to the knowledge on the successful programme. In particular, the studies by Stipp & Schiavone (1996) and Stipp (1998) confirmed the beneficial effects on a sponsor’s public image, with positive repercussions even for the stock market (Miyazaki & Morgan, 2001).

Since these initial studies were conducted, research on Olympic sponsorship in recent years has focused on the empirical analysis of effectiveness (Yazdanparast & Bayar, 2021) and brand impact (Rutter et al., 2020), confirming the benefits of the event. Other studies have examined much more specific issues: brand strategies (Papadimitriou et al., 2008), case studies of sponsors such as Visa (Jensen et al., 2016) and Coca-Cola (Coburn & McCafferty, 2017), the impact on employee perception of the sponsors (Edwards, 2016), legal regulation (Burton & Bradish, 2019), and the use of storytelling through Paralympic athletes (Beldame et al., 2023).

Some, such as those by Finlay (2018) and Abeza et al. (2021), have looked into the digital and interactive dimension. Finlay (2018) analysed the controversy created by Rule 40 of the Olympic Charter, which regulates athletes’ posts on social media to prevent ambush marketing actions, but at the same time restricts the athletes’ freedom of expression. Along similar lines, Abeza et al. (2021) related brands’ digital strategies around the event to ambush marketing, a very fertile field of research. Those authors concluded that ambushers’ strategies had become increasingly opportunistic, subtle and sophisticated, linked to associative techniques and having values that were difficult to trace and regulate. In addition, they stated that “a study that compares how sponsors use social media versus ambushers can inform us as to whether sponsors are using the social media space to activate their sponsorship” (Abeza et al., 2021, p. 274).

Research on sponsorship in football is also very abundant (Maldonado-Erazo et al., 2019), with studies on professional leagues, clubs and major events. FIFA World Cups have also been a recurring focus, albeit without as much depth as in other areas. The study approaches are similar to those taken to the Olympic Games. For example, the study by Nufer & Bühler (2010) replicated the analysis of consumer effects, and the study by Portlock & Rose (2009) examined the association between sponsoring brands and those that practice ambush marketing.

In recent years, published articles have inevitably addressed corruption-related events from the perspective of sponsorship, in which cases relating to FIFA’s lack of integrity were correlated with the decrease in value of sponsors’ returns for stockholders (Hundt & Horsch, 2019); the reputational transfer between the host, FIFA and sponsors (Coelho et al., 2019), corporate social responsibility (Kulczycki, Pfister & Koenigstorfer, 2020), and even the dispute over the supply of alcohol by a sponsor at the last FIFA World Cup (Dun & Rachdi, 2023). It is noteworthy that all these studies of the experiences of France ‘98, Germany 2006, Brazil 2014 or Qatar 2022 showed less positive effects on, and public perceptions of, the sponsor brands than similar studies on the Olympic Games.

Lastly, it is worth noting the fairly uncommon comparative study approach to the two mega-events, such as that taken by Madrigal et al. (2005) and Uhrich, Koenigstorfer & Gröppel-Klein (2013), with the first being on brand value and the second on corporate social responsibility.

1.2. Digital sponsorship activation 

 

In one of the first studies on sponsorship activation on the Internet, Weeks, Cornwell & Drennan (2008, p. 638) indicated that, “with respect to sponsorship-linked marketing” the term “activation relates to those communications that encourage interaction with the sponsor”. Such activation, which involves an investment in addition to the contract with the sports property, has become a basic practice within a sponsorship strategy whose most common actions are traditional advertising, events, internal communications, public relations, hospitality, commercial promotions, editorial content and, for several decades now, social media dynamics (IEG, 2017). It has such significance that the professional and academic debate is not about whether activation should be implemented, but instead about the suitability of the amount of money to be allocated to that activity. In fact, to find out what the optimal figure is, the ratio of investment in activation per Euro invested in a sponsorship contract has been used as a unit of measure. Academic articles (O’Reilly & Horning, 2013) and professional studies have both determined that the average earmarked amounts ranged from 1:0.5 (Dircom, 2015) to 1:1 (IEG, 2017). However, the IEG, one of the global agencies of reference, has itself recognised that the ratio depends on each company’s sponsorship objectives and circumstances, and that the concept of activation ratios is practically dead (IEG, 2022).

Having analysed the concept, it is appropriate to review several specific studies on activation in the digital field such as those by Abeza et al. (2014) and Gillooly et al. (2017). Abeza et al. (2014), on the Olympic Games, studied the sponsorship activation on X of the TOP sponsors of the Sochi 2014 Winter Olympic Games. Among the findings was the higher number of posts during the Games than in the weeks pre- and post-Games. At the same time, objectives of “promotion (of services, products, and company’s image), customer appreciation, and athlete encouragement” (2014:210) were identified. Meanwhile, Gillooly et al. (2017) did an in-depth study on the categorisation of activation content on X for the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games from the perspective of the uses and gratifications theory. The authors concluded that most of the tweets analysed (68%) were devoted to informing, whereas 16% were devoted to interacting, 13% to rewarding and very few (2%) to entertaining. 

Close to our object of study are other articles of great interest. Papadimitriou & Apostolopoulou (2009), taking a qualitative approach and prior to the explosion of social media, classified sponsors into two types: more active ones that carry out planned activation and less active ones that do not take advantage of the communication opportunities offered to them. Geurin & Gee (2014) conducted a case study on the digital activation of the Canadian brewery Molson in the case of Sochi 2014, noting that the posts focused more on informing than interacting. Burton et al. (2021), referring to the PyeongChang 2018 Winter Olympics and Paralympics, comparatively analysed X and Instagram from a national perspective, revealing uneven activity for the two events, it being much less active for the Paralympics.

In the case of the FIFA World Cup, we found two Spanish studies. The first by García Mirón (2012) revealed the almost initiatic use of social media by the sponsors of the Spanish national team at the FIFA World Cup 2010, where a conversation between fans and brands was achieved, thus obtaining complicity and loyalty. The second by Pérez-Seoane et al. (2023) analysed users’ reactions to videos posted by FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022 sponsors on YouTube, concluding that the sponsoring brands had reached high rates of notoriety by associating themselves with this event, and that audience criticism of their association with the controversial championship was residual.

Worthy of mention are other recent studies that, while not focusing on the two mega-events in question, reveal the most findings on digital sponsorship activation. The first by Mastromartino & Naraine (2022) studied the activity on NHL social media during the pandemic and pointed out a lack of innovation in digital strategies, thus causing a decrease in interaction. Another study in which Naraine was a co-author (Naraine et al., 2022) stated that “sport organizations need to reconsider their social media strategy, working with partners to organically embed sponsors into content”. In relation to trends, Kaushik et al. (2022) specifically addressed interactivity in sponsorship activation on X in the tennis environment, demonstrating the effectiveness for brands of such interaction with fans. Schönberner & Woratschek (2023), through an online experiment with consumers, also endorsed the effectiveness of the technique by demonstrating that the sponsors’ activations increased customer engagement when embedded in the sports organization's original narrative.

To conclude this review, mention should be made of the cross-pollination concept, understood from a system perspective and applied to social media communications; thus, ‘cross-pollination’ is the name we give to the interconnection of the various presences of a brand, in this instance on social media, in search of a positive feedback loop in the digital field (Fernández, 2016; Fernández et al., 2022).

2.       OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to perform a comparative analysis of the activation of sponsorship of the Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games and FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022 on social media. Four specific objectives were defined:

O1. To analyse X and Instagram content linked to 16 brands’ sponsorship activation, considering the number of posts devoted to activation. 

O2. To know the main uses and themes of the social media content published to activate the sponsorship.

O3. To analyse the existence of cross-pollination between global and national strategies, and between the strategies used on X and Instagram.

1.   Mixed methodology

A descriptive content analysis of the posts on X (Twitter at the time of conducting the study) and Instagram by the official sponsors of the Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games and the FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022 was proposed. This study adopted the methodology that Hsieh and Shannon (2005:1278) described as “a research method for the subjective interpretation of the content of text data through the systematic classification process of coding and identifying themes or patterns”, using posts as units of analysis (Lin & Pena, 2011). Content analysis has been widely used in the study of social media and is a useful tool for identifying the creativity and strategies used by brands on social media (Ashley & Tuten, 2015).

The analysis had two stages: The first was quantitative and followed the methodological steps established by Abeza et al. (2014), counting the number of sponsor posts pre-, during and post- event. The second was qualitative and interpreted the collected posts as one of four content types (depending on the objective of that content): informing, entertaining, rewarding or interacting. This analysis matrix was drawn from Gillooly et al. (2017) and can be reviewed in depth in Table 1 in the Annex, with the description of the categories and sources behind the classification.

2.   Content analysis sample and fieldwork

Work began by identifying the official global and national social media accounts of the official sponsors of Tokyo 2020 and Qatar 2022. In the case of Tokyo 2020, the group of sponsors that were “Worldwide Partners” of the IOC (n=14) was considered. Regarding Qatar 2022, FIFA Partners (official sponsors of the institution, n=6) and FIFA World Cup Sponsors (sponsors of the event, n=7) were identified. Both global and national accounts were found on the corporate websites of the brands. In some cases, however, the global accounts did not have a global vocation as they were aimed at the community around the parent company of the group. This was the case for Coca-Cola, focusing on the United States, and Toyota, focusing on Japan.

Of the 14 IOC sponsors, five were excluded from the analysis as they did not have active X or Instagram accounts in Spain. These were the Alibaba Group, Atos, Intel, Omega and Procter & Gamble. In the case of FIFA, those that did not have a X or Instagram account in Spain were excluded. These were Wanda, Qatar Airways, Crypto.com, Byju’s and Mengniu Dairy. Vivo was included, however, as despite not having a global X account, its other accounts were global. Similarly, the accounts of Kia and Hyundai (differentiated consumer brands) were included, even though they both belonged to the same sponsor (Hyundai Motor Group). It should also be noted that two sponsors were present at both events: Visa and Coca-Cola.

 

Table 1. X and Instagram accounts of the Olympic Games sponsors.

 

Sponsor	Year of affiliation to the IOC	Global X account and number of followers	National X account and number of followers	Global Instagram account and number of followers	National Instagram account and number of followers
Allianz	2018	@Allianz 51,478	@Allianz_es 19,752	@allianz 95,658	@allianz_es 30,759
Airbnb	2019	@Airbnb 794,666	@airbnb_es 21,395	@airbnb 5,157,614	@airbnbes 742
Bridgestone	2014	@Bridgestone 101,600	@Bridgestone_H 17,100	@bridgestonetires 91,700	@bridgestoneespana 25,500
Coca-Cola	1928	@CocaCola 3,300,000	@CocaCola_es 140,700	@cocacola 2,800,000	@cocacola_esp 136,000
Deloitte	2022	@Deloitte 558,604	@Deloitte_ES 24,879	@deloitte 197,000	@deloitte_es 8,858
Panasonic	1987	@panasonic 65,116	@panasonicESP 15,137	@panasonic_global 6,660	@panasonicesp 24,100
Samsung	1988 (local sponsor)	@Samsung 625,770	@SamsungEspana 318,216	@samsung 771,000	@samsungespana 348,000
Toyota	2015	@Toyota_Esp 100,400	@ToyotaMotorCorp 216,800	@Toyota 4,164,897	@Toyota 76,240
Visa	1986	@Visa 407,937	@Visa_ES 4,096	@visa_us 104,823	@visa_es 4,429

 

Source: Our compilation. Follower figures as at April or May 2022.

Table 2. X and Instagram accounts of FIFA World Cup sponsors.

 

Sponsor	Year of affiliation	Global X account and number of followers	National X account and number of followers	Global Instagram account and number of followers	National Instagram account and number of followers
Adidas	1970	@adidas 4,200,000	@adidas_ES 924,600	@adidas 26,628,773	@adidas_es 1,027,148
Coca-Cola	1978	@TrophyTour 3,400,000	@CocaCola_es 17,600	@trophytour 2,827,045	@cocacola_esp 5,975
Hyundai	2002	@Hyundai_Global 322,300	@HyundaiEsp 41,100	@hyundai 1,212,293	@hyundaiesp 52,362
Kia	2002	@kia_Worldwide 255,721	@KiaEspana 71,634	@kia.worldwide 687,000	@kiaspain 57,200
Visa	2007	@Visa 410,700	@Visa_ES 4,021	@visa 126,907	@visa_es 5,038
Budweiser	1986	@Budweiser 22,064	@Budweiser_es 13,989	@budweiser 569,318	@budweiserspain 11,250
Hi-Sense	2017	@HisenseGlobal 105,572	@HisenseIberiaES 7,963	@hisense_international 20,953	@hisenseiberiaes 17,746
McDonald’s	1994	@McDonalds 4,737,329	@mcdonalds_es 6,730	@mcdonalds 4,520,591	@mcdonalds_es 154,096

 

Source: Our compilation. Follower figures as at April or May 2022.

 

The time period for the analysis of Tokyo 2020 began on 8 July, 14 days before the start of Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games, and ended on 21 August, 14 days after the closing ceremony. With these 28 days being added to the 17 days when the Games were actually held, the total period was 45 days. With regard to Qatar 2022, the analysis began on 10 November, 10 days before the start of the FIFA World Cup, and ended on 28 December, 10 days after the closing ceremony. The total period was therefore 49 days. So, taking into account that during the last leg of the FIFA World Cup there were four days with no activity, the periods covered by the analysis of both events were very similar.

As for the data collection process, fieldwork for Tokyo 2020 took place between May and July 2022, while that for Qatar 2022 was done in April and May 2023. The information was recorded and divided into two data sheets, an individual one for each post and an overall one for each social media account on the two platforms, which in turn had a series of analysis categories, mainly at the content type categorisation stage. The number of X and Instagram posts were counted by direct observation. In the case of X, the count was compared to that of Twitonomy tool. Direct observation – unlike software tools that extract a large amount of data about interaction or engagement – allowed content to be critically interpreted in relation to the analysis variables. All the extracted information was processed using Microsoft Excel. 

Lastly, some data collection issues should be noted. Samsung’s national X account did not allow us to go further back than 2 September 2021 given the high volume of posts. That is why the analysis table contains zeros, even though it is clearly a matter of unknown data. Panasonic, for its part, began posting on Instagram in January 2022, even though it had already set up the account but not used it. Airbnb España had an Instagram account but no posts. In the direct observation of “Interacting”, posts on a theme unrelated to the one in the post to which they were responding were excluded. For example, when a user made a claim or complaint about a product or service of the company. Brand posts that were part of a conversation or a thread were counted.

3.       RESULTS
   1.   Volume of posts

In this section, the posts by the 16 sponsors to their global and national accounts on the two social media platforms (X and Instagram) are quantified for each of the two mega-events analysed (Tables 4 and 5 in the Annex). Three aspects are highlighted: 1) the percentage of posts dedicated to each sporting event, 2) the proportion of posts during the different phases of the event, and 3) the relationship between global and national posts. 

The total sample analysed was 4,791 posts about the two mega-events on both social media platforms. Of that total, 3,456 posts were on X (72%) and 1,326 (28%) on Instagram. Also of that total, 2,333 posts were about the Olympic Games and 2,458 about the FIFA World Cup. Therefore, the analysed volume for each event was balanced and as commonly found in similar studies, the number of posts was much higher on X than on Instagram. That was the case for the two events, though the proportion was bigger for the Olympic Games (X: 81.5% / Instagram: 18.5%) than for the FIFA World Cup (X: 63.5% / Instagram: 26.5%).

Regarding the percentages of total posts by the sponsors about each mega-event, it was 17.4% for the Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games and 69.1% for Qatar 2022. There was an imbalance among Olympic sponsors in terms of posting content about the Games. Three brands focused their stories on the networks in the Olympic event: Bridgestone (59.5%), Visa (58.3%) and Panasonic (38%). For their part, three companies exceeded 10% of posts on this topic: Toyota (17.6%), Allianz (16%) and Samsung (11%). However, three others: Coca Cola (6.8%), Airbnb 6.1% and Deloitte (2.7%) displayed a residual use of content about the Games to promote their brands on X and Instagram. Regarding the FIFA World Cup, Adidas (54.1%), Hi-Sense (76.6%), Kia (66.5%) and Vivo (53.3%) had a high percentage of posts, though Budweiser stood out for its almost full involvement (90.2%). In contrast, Coca-Cola and Hyundai had lower percentages (37.9% and 26.9%, respectively), and McDonald’s stood out for not posting anything about the FIFA World Cup.

The second variable analysed was the percentage of total posts in the different phases of each event. In the case of the Olympics, it was 36% in the pre-event period, 38.6% during the event and 25.4% post-event. The IOC has traditionally tried to have a media presence beyond the 16 days of the Olympic Games, when it attracts the entire world’s attention. Therefore, the higher number of posts in the moments before and after the Games compared to the FIFA World Cup could be explained by the IOC’s need as noted above. In this sense, one of the main strategies to extend this media presence to the period between Games was the creation in 2016 of the Olympic Channel (Fernández-Peña & Ramajo, 2021). Regarding the FIFA World Cup, there were considerable variations; 11.8% in the pre-event period, 78.4% during the event and 9.8% post-event. The figures are much higher in the case of the FIFA World Cup as the percentage of posts relating to activation was 67.7%. This therefore reveals that, in the case of an event with greater sponsor involvement, the bulk of activation posts is concentrated in the period when the event is being held.That trend is the same among highly involved Olympic Games sponsors such as Bridgestone, the first sponsor of the Olympic Channel, with 52% of its posts during the Games, and Visa, with 44%.

The last of the three variables of this first stage of the quantitative analysis of posts interprets the interconnection between the global and Spanish accounts on the two social media platforms. The territorial comparison reveals that Spanish accounts on the Olympic Games posted 19.1% of the Tokyo 2020-related posts, while globally it was 16%. In the case of the FIFA World Cup, it was 46% nationally and 79.3% globally. Regarding the football event, there was a notable difference in the involvement of global profiles, which was accompanied by a higher volume of posts (65%).

The different strategies used can be observed in the brand posts. In the case of the Olympic Games, Toyota and Bridgestone stood out in particular as there was some similarity between the national Instagram and X accounts of the Japanese brands, whereas their global accounts on the two platforms employed very different tactics. Toyota did not post anything about the Olympic Games on Instagram. In fact, it only posted photographs of vehicles. Whereas its activity on X was high, with 57.4% of the posts being about the Olympic Games. Bridgestone was the paradigm of regularity and involvement in the Olympic Games, since its four accounts distributed a high number of posts, so it had a joined-up strategy when activating sponsorship. With less involvement, the social media of Allianz and Deloitte were relatively homogeneous in terms of both the different accounts and territories. 

Regarding activation in the case of the FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022, cases similar to Bridgestone in the Olympic Games were observed, in which there was regularity across the different social media and a high number of posts about the event (Budweiser, Adidas, Hi-Sense and Vivo). With a clear imbalance in the handling of the different territorial accounts we find Hyundai and Kia, whose Spanish accounts hardly covered the FIFA World Cup yet whose global accounts (especially Kia’s) generated significant activation. The case of McDonald’s was striking, with its low activity on social media with just 36 posts, none of which were about the FIFA World Cup. 

In the cases of Coca-Cola and Visa, and as sponsors of both events, we are able to analyse, in parallel, the strategy used by each of them. Visa was one of the sponsors that generated the most digital content about the Olympic Games (58%). It was striking to find that all the posts on Instagram in Spain in the analysed period were about Tokyo 2020, whereas there was just one related post on the American account. On X there was also a difference between the two accounts; there was high involvement in the national account and 33.3% involvement in the American account. In the case of the FIFA World Cup, Visa’s activation was striking because it did not post anything about Qatar 2022 on any of its four social media accounts. This is odd when compared to the FIFA Women’s World Cup Australia & New Zealand 2023, for which it created abundant content.^[1]

Coca-Cola is a historic sponsor of the two mega-events. However, not all of its accounts paid the same level of attention to the Olympic and FIFA World Cup events. For example, the Spanish profiles did not post anything about the sports events. Globally, its number of posts on X was uneven, with 53% about the Olympic Games and 5% about the FIFA World Cup. On Instagram, however, 37.5% of the posts were about the Olympic Games and, as far as the FIFA World Cup (@trophytour) is concerned, the brand was wholly invested, with 100% of the posts being devoted to activation.

Table 3. Number and percentage of posts on X and Instagram for the Olympic Games.

Brands	Total posts during period analysed	Total post during Olympic Games	% Posts about Olympic Games
Toyota	267	47	17.6%
Visa	84	49	58.3%
Allianz	225	36	16%
Airbnb	246	15	6.1%
Panasonic	121	46	38%
Deloitte	257	7	2.7%
Samsung	85	10	11.7%
Bridgestone	225	134	59.5%
Coca-Cola	823	56	6.8%
Total brands	2333	400	17.4%

Source: Our compilation.

Table 4. Number and percentage of posts on X and Instagram for the FIFA World Cup.

Brands	Total posts during period analysed	Total posts during FIFA World Cup	% Posts about FIFA World Cup
Adidas	109	33	54.1%
Budweiser	996	918	90.2%
Coca-Cola	219	83	37.9%
Hi-Sense	192	147	76.6%
Hyundai	216	58	26.9%
Kia	561	378	66.5%
McDonald’s	36	0	0%
Visa	24	0	0%
Vivo	105	56	53.3%
Total brands	2458	1673	69.1%

Source: Our compilation.

2.   Type of posts

 

In this subsection, we analyse the types of post by the 16 sponsors on their global and national X and Instagram accounts for each of the two mega-events. In order to do this and based on the typology by Gillooly et al. (2017) (see Table 1 in the Annex), four main content types (informing, entertaining, rewarding and interacting) were established, which in turn were divided into 17 categories. 

In the case of Tokyo 2020 (see Table 6, with examples of posts, in the Annex), “informing” (47%) and “interacting” (44.5%) were the two main objectives of digital communications in sponsorship activation by brands associated with the Olympic Games. Interaction with audiences constitutes one of the main goals in communication on social networks (Achen et al., 2017). There were only a few isolated cases of the other communication objectives on social media – “entertaining” (2.5%) and “rewarding” (6%) – among the set of brands analysed. Similarly, only a few brands – Coca-Cola being one of them – created short videos for the purpose of entertaining, and brands such as Visa, Bridgestone, Panasonic and Toyota proposed prize competitions for users within the context of the Olympic Games.
 

Figure 1. Bridgestone’s social media dynamic with the golfer Lexi Thompson.

 

Source: Bridgestone’s global Instagram account (@bridgestonetires)

 

The most common categories in the “informing” type were “activational promotion” (18.5%), “event observations” (13.5%) and “company promotion” (9.7%). 

Regarding the “interacting” type, “congratulations” (15%), “participant messages” (10%), “following recommendations” (7%) and “wishing them luck” (5.7%) stood out the most. Many of the posts corresponding to “event observations” (13.5%) consisted of information about the participation of athletes who were individually sponsored by the brand as ambassadors of it. If they achieved sporting success, the brand posted a “congratulations” message (15%). As a result, this dynamic, which is linked to the protagonism of individual athletes acting as brand ambassadors, accounted for around 30% of the total (Allyson Felix with Bridgestone, Lydia Valentín with Bridgestone España; Alex Morgan with-Coca Cola USA, Jonnie Peacock and former Olympian Scottie Pippen with Airbnb, Niko Shera with Toyota España, or the group of 233 Global Team Toyota Athletes).
 

Figure 2. Olympic event observations by Toyota España.

Source: Toyota’s national X account (@Toyota_Esp).

Table 5. Classification of posts about the Olympic Games.

 

 

Type	Category	No	%
Informing	Company promotion	39	9.7%
	Sharing the news	15	3.7%
	Deal announcement	1	0.25%
	Activational promotion	75	18.7%
	Event observations	54	13.5%
	Subtotal	188	47%
Entertaining	Playing games	5	1.2%
	Fun facts	5	1.2%
	Subtotal	10	2.5%
Rewarding	Prize competitions	24	6%
	Winners	0	0%
	Rules	0	0%
	Subtotal	24	6%
Interacting	Following recommendations	28	7%
	Follower greetings	1	0.2%
	Chit-chatting	5	1.2%
	Wishing them luck	23	5.7%
	Congratulations	60	15%
	Q&A	11	2.7%
	Participant messages	40	10%
	Subtotal	178	44.5%
Total		400

 

Source: Our compilation.

 

Figure 3. Budweiser’s social media dynamic with the Player of the Match.

 

Source: Budweiser’s global Instagram account (@budweiser)

 

Regarding Qatar 2022, “informing” (36.6%) and “interacting” (45.1%) were the predominant content types. As in the case of the Olympic event, they constituted the two main objectives of the FIFA World Cup sponsors’ digital activation. The percentages for the other two communication objectives on social media were much lower: “entertaining” (12.5%) and “rewarding” (5.6%). The national X accounts of Vivo España and Budweiser Spain were the main sources of posts aimed at entertaining, as they generated numerous “fun facts” tweets in which events surrounding the FIFA World Cup were observed through humorous videos in a tone and language targeting the younger audience.

The most common categories in the “informing” type were “activational promotion” (16.5%), “event observations” (11.5%) and “company promotion” (5.7%). Standing out in this content type was the Budweiser strategy that, on three of its four accounts, covered the nomination of a “Player of the Match”, a specific action of the brewing brand with FIFA.

Regarding the “interacting” type – “chit-chatting” (16%), “congratulations” (11.1%), “participant messages” (10%), “Q&A” (4.6%) and “wish them luck” (4.12%) – two stand-out examples on X were the @kia_Worldwide strategy of encouraging users to post videos of themselves cheering on their national teams throughout the FIFA World Cup, and Vivo España’s Q&A.

Figure 4. Video-sharing dynamic by Kia follower.

 

Source: Kia’s global X account (@kia_Worldwide)

 

Table 6. Classification of posts about the FIFA World Cup.

 

 

Type	Category	No	%
Informing	Company promotion	96	5.7%
	Sharing the news	31	1.8%
	Deal announcement	9	0.5%
	Activational promotion	284	16.9%
	Event observations	193	11.5%
	Subtotal	613	36.6%
Entertaining	Playing games	8	0.47%
	Fun facts	201	12%
	Subtotal	209	12.5%
Rewarding	Prize Competitions	49	2.9%
	Winners	46	2.7%
	Rules	0	0%
	Subtotal	95	5.6%
Interacting	Following recommendations	11	0.65%
	Follower greetings	27	1.61%
	Chit-chatting	268	16%
	Wishing them luck	69	4.12%
	Congratulations	187	11.1%
	Q&A	78	4.6%
	Participant Messages	116	6.9%
	Subtotal	756	45.1%
Total		1,673	100%

 

Source: Our compilation.

4.       DISCUSSION

Let us now review the three objectives of this study: O1 aimed to analyse X and Instagram content linked to 16 brands’ sponsorship activation, taking into account the number of posts devoted to activation. The results showed a considerable difference between the Olympic Games and the FIFA World Cup; the sponsors devoted 17.4% of their posts to the first mega-event and 69.1% to the second. Therefore, greater sponsor involvement was observed in the case of Qatar 2022, which is consistent with the results obtained in the study by Abeza et al. (2014), which asserted that the sponsors most involved in events registered a sharp increase in posts during the event itself.

Beyond the analysis of each mega-event, we identified three activation strategy patterns among the 16 sponsors analysed:

•        A category of sponsors whose event coverage and harnessing of the benefits of sponsorship in their digital activity was very high: Bridgestone (59.5%) and Visa (58.3%) in the case of the Olympic Games, and Budweiser (90.2%), Hi-Sense (76.6%), Kia (66.5%), Visa (59.5%), Adidas (54.1%) and Vivo (53.3%) in the FIFA World Cup. 
•        A category of sponsors that mentioned sponsorship in their timelines, but whose stories on the social media platforms did not revolve around the sponsored event. This included Panasonic (36%), Toyota (17.6%) and Allianz (16%) in the case of the Olympic Games, and Coca-Cola (37.9%) and Hyundai (26.9%) in the FIFA World Cup. 
•        A category of sponsors that did not activate their Olympic Games and/or FIFA World Cup sponsorship on their digital channels. This included Airbnb, Samsung and Coca-Cola in the first case and McDonald’s and Visa in the second. 

Thus, the order identified by Papadimitriou & Apostolopoulou (2009) was maintained. Those authors classified sponsors into two types: those who carry out planned activation, with greater or lesser intensity, and those less active ones that do not take advantage of the opportunities offered to them. Likewise, these findings are consistent with those from the study by Abeza et al. (2014), where digital activation did not display any orderly pattern in terms of X activity.

The second objective (O2) was to ascertain the main uses and themes of social media content published for the purpose of activating sponsorship. There is clear consistency between the strategies applied by the sponsors of the two events when creating content for the purposes of informing (47% Olympic Games and 36.6% FIFA World Cup) and interacting (44.5% Olympic Games and 45.1% FIFA World Cup). The only difference lies basically in a lower dose of information in the case of the FIFA World Cup, which was replaced by a greater desire to entertain. These data represent an evolution compared to those obtained from the study by Gillooly et al. (2017), which concluded that most of the tweets analysed (68%) were devoted to informing, whereas 16% were devoted to interacting, 13% to rewarding and very few (2%) to entertaining. Albeit with similar parameters, Abeza et al. (2014:206) stated that in Sochi 2014 “promotion was the dominant objective uncovered in the TOP sponsors’ X feeds”, which coincides with the predominant subcategory “activational promotion” (18.5% and 16%, respectively). It can therefore be concluded that communications that provide justification for the company’s investment remain valid, and that they tend towards interacting with users. Along these lines, the categories with the highest percentages were “congratulations” (15% Olympic Games and 11.1% FIFA World Cup) and “participant messages” (10% both). In the case of the FIFA World Cup, the percentage of posts devoted to “chit-chatting” (16%) stood out.

The third objective (O3) sought to analyse the existence of cross-pollination between global and national strategies, and between the strategies used on X and Instagram. Regarding the global and national strategies of the brands that dedicated a significant percentage of their posts on their accounts to talking about the events, we found two patterns, regardless of volume. On the one hand, those that maintained a degree of symmetry across their four accounts, that is, an even volume of messages devoted to activation. This was the case for Bridgestone, Allianz, Deloitte, Budweiser, Adidas, Hi-Sense and Vivo. Toyota regularly posted on three social media accounts but not on its global Instagram account. And, on the other hand, those brands whose accounts were marked by asymmetry, in other words, that used the global account (Kia and Hyundai) to channel the discourse about the Olympic Games or the FIFA World Cup, or that activated communication nationally but not locally in the case of the Olympic Games (Visa). Therefore, a partial use of cross-pollination was observed in brand stories.

5.       CONCLUSIONS

This comparative study of the activation of the sponsorship of two sports mega-events – Tokyo 2020 and the FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022 – on social media revealed some significant findings, which are reflected in these conclusions.

Firstly, the notable differences between the sponsors’ strategies for each event. In the case of Tokyo 2020, the brands’ communications on their social media were less linked to the sports event. Their actions were disparate, however, since we found the involvement of some companies was high while that of others was low, with national accounts being the most active. The most used/activated themes were informing and interacting, with a predominance of content talking about the company or interacting with athletes forming part of their sponsorship. 

The sponsors’ activation in the case of the FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022 was greater than in the Olympic Games, with global accounts predominating in their intensity. The main themes within the content also coincided with informing and interacting, with the greater use of entertaining being noteworthy. Thus, the greater involvement of the FIFA World Cup sponsors was clear to see; they took more risks and made use of dynamics aimed at interacting with fans, co-creating and fostering humour, while activation in the case of the Olympic Games was more institutional in nature. It is true that the Olympic Games are a more sophisticated event focusing on the values of sport, whereas the FIFA World Cup is more emotional and linked to national pride, quite the opposite of the Olympic Games, which inspire people to be the best version of themselves, as well as global unity. It is the identity and character of each event that guides the communication strategies of brands using it as a platform to connect with their audiences. 

Taking an in-depth look into their strategies, we found a form of digital activation by brands whose aim was to complement the sports spectacle by becoming a second screen. Social media have become powerful tools for brands seeking to connect with their followers in a deeper and more meaningful way, and that is especially true in the field of sport. Social media are a great way to interact with followers and create a community around the brand (Cornwell, 2019). In our study, the analysed brands made much greater use of X than Instagram. We also observed that the sponsors’ roles were different, which we grouped into three categories: high activity, medium activity and no activity. We consider this “second screen” factor to be a trend because followers are using social media more and more often to comment on live sports events, to share their opinions and experiences, and to interact with other people who share their interests. Brands can use social media to get involved by offering engaging content, running competitions, replying to comments and questions from followers, and informing about a team, a sport, an athlete, etc. (Gillooly et al., 2017). 

However, discovering that cross-pollination had only been partially used in brand stories shows that brands have different global and local account strategies, with corporate objectives in their communications.  Social media allow brands to benefit the sports community, which helps increase customer engagement and credibility among their followers (Schönberner & Woratschek, 2023). However, there are brands that, despite being sponsors, are prepared to forego that strategic opportunity. Brands that have high posting rates are those that truly make a complementary use of digital content on the different accounts and social media platforms, and at different territorial levels. The strategy of such brands is to impact their audiences through sponsorship, making strategic use of activation by offering them “something more” useful and entertaining, sometimes differentiated at global and local levels.

This study presents some limitations due to the difficulty of gaining access to the marketing departments and social media managers of the different sponsors, and to the marketing heads of the IOC and of the FIFA World Cup. Therefore, we are aware that it would have been desirable to incorporate an analysis of professional protagonists to contrast the extracted data and to describe the strategies. In future studies, it would likewise be desirable to use far-reaching tools to record the content generating the most engagement among X and Instagram users, and to explore the use of other high-growth social media platforms such as TikTok in sponsorship activation, especially with the soon to be held Paris 2024 Olympic Games and the 2026 World Cup.

6.       REFERENCES

Abeza, G., Braunstein-Minkove, J. R., Séguin, B., O’Reilly, N., Kim, A., & Abdourazakou, Y. (2021). Ambush Marketing Via Social Media: The Case of the Three Most Recent Olympic Games. International Journal of Sport Communication, 14(2), 255-279. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijsc.2020-0266

Abeza, G., Pegoraro, A., Naraine, M.L., Séguin, B., & O’Reilly, N. (2014). Activating a global sport sponsorship with social media: an analysis of TOP sponsors, Twitter, and the 2014 Olympic Games. International Journal of Sport Management and Marketing, 15(3-4), 184-213.

Achen, R. M. (2017). Measuring social media marketing: Moving towards a relationship-marketing approach. Managing Sport and Leisure, 22(1), 33-53. https://doi.org/10.1080/23750472.2017.1379883

     Achen, R. M., Lebel, K., & Clavio, G. (2017). What customers want: Defining engagement on social media in sport. Global Sport Business Journal, 5(3), 1-21.

Anagnostopoulos, C., Parganas, P., Chadwick, S., & Fenton, A. (2018). Branding in pictures: Using Instagram as a brand management tool in professional team sport organisations. European Sport Management Quarterly, 18(5), 414-438. https://doi.org/10.1080/16184742.2017.1410202

Ashley, C. & Tuten, T. (2015). Creative strategies in social media marketing: an exploratory study of branded social content and consumer engagement. Psychology & Marketing, 32(1), 15-27.

Beldame, Y., Joncheray, H., Duquesne, V., & Richard, R. (2023). They Don’t Really Care about my Results, they Prefer Selling my Life Story. Inspirational Paralympians and Sponsorship. Communication & Sport, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/21674795231158542

Brown-Devlin, N., Devlin, M. B., Billings, A. C., & Brown, K. A. (2021). Five Rings, Five Screens? A Global Examination of Social TV Influence on Social Presence and Social Identification During the 2018 Winter Olympic Games. Communication & Sport, 9(6), 865-887. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167479519899142

Burton, N. (2019). Exploring user sentiment towards sponsorship and ambush marketing. International Journal of Sports Marketing and Sponsorship, 20(4), 583-602. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSMS-03-2019-0026

Burton, N., & Bradish, C. (2019). Commercial rights management in post-legislative Olympic sponsorship. Sport, Business and Management, 9(2), 201-220. https://doi.org/10.1108/SBM-02-2018-0005

Burton, N., Naraine, M. L., & Scott O. (2021). Exploring Paralympic digital sponsorship strategy: an analysis of social media activation, Managing Sport and Leisure. https://doi.org/10.1080/23750472.2021.1990789

Chanavat, N., & Desbordes, M. (2014). Towards the regulation and restriction of ambush marketing? The first truly social and digital mega sports event: Olympic Games, London 2012. International Journal of Sports Marketing and Sponsorship, 15(3), 2-11.

Coburn, A., & McCafferty, P. (2017). The Real Olympic Games: Sponsorship, Schools, and the Olympics—the Case of Coca-Cola. Taboo: The Journal of Culture and Education, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.31390/taboo.15.1.05

Coelho, M. G. R., Amorim, J. G. B. de., & Almeida, V. M. C. de. (2019). Sports Mega-Event Sponsorship: The Impact of FIFA Reputation and World Cup Image on Sponsor Brand Equity. BAR-Brazilian Administration Review, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-7692bar2019180071

Cornwell, T. B. (2019). Less “sponsorship as advertising” and more sponsorship-linked marketing as authentic engagement. Journal of Advertising, 48(1), 49-60. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2019.1588809

Dees, W. (2011). New media and technology use in corporate sport sponsorship: performing activation leverage from an exchange perspective. International Journal of Sport Management and Marketing, 10(3-4), 272-285.

Dun, S., & Rachdi, H. (2023). Mixing FIFA World Cup alcohol sponsorship agreements with Islamic host countries: a conceptual framework. Journal of Islamic Marketing. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIMA-11-2022-0294

Edwards, M. R. (2016). The Olympic effect: Employee reactions to their employer's sponsorship of a high‐profile global sporting event. Human Resource Management, 55(4), 721-740. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21702

Fernández Peña, E. (2016). Juegos Olímpicos, televisión y redes sociales. UOC.

Fernández Peña, E., Ramajo, N., & Nieto, A. (2022). A cross-pollination of fame? Star athletes and influencers on Instagram. In The Dynamics of Influencer Marketing (pp. 143-164). Routledge.

Fernández-Peña, E., & Ramajo-Hernández, N. (2021). Olympic Channel: Digital strategy and content Olympic Channel: Estrategia digital y contenidos. Journal of Human Sport and Exercise, 16(1), S1-S13.  https://doi.org/10.14198/jhse.2021.16.Proc1.01   

Ferrand, A., Chappelet, J. L., & Benoît, S. (2012). Olympic Marketing. Routledge.

FIFA (2023). Annual Report. https://publications.fifa.com/es/annual-report-2022/ 

FIFA (January 18^th 2023). Un mes después: 5.000 millones interactuaron con la Copa Mundial de la FIFA Catar 2022. Inside FIFA. https://bit.ly/4cSB5YK 

Finlay, C. J. (2018). The Right to Profitable Speech: Olympians, Sponsorship, and Social Media Discourse. Communication & Sport, 6(6), 655-679. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167479517739389

García Mirón S. (2012). La comunicación de experiencias de marca a través de las redes sociales: análisis de caso de los patrocinadores del Mundial de Fútbol 2010. Pensar la Publicidad. Revista Internacional de Investigaciones Publicitarias, 5(2), 93-118. https://doi.org/10.5209/rev_PEPU.2011.v5.n2.37865

Garcia-Albacete, G., & Theocharis, Y. (2014). Opportunities and challenges of analysing Twitter content: a comparison on the occupation movements in Spain, Greece and the United States. In Cantijoch, M., Gibson, R., & Ward, S. (Eds). Analysing Social Media Data and Web Networks. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, 119-153.

Geurin, A. N., & Gee, S. (2014). Alcohol, sponsorship, and new media activation: An investigation of Molson Canadian and the 2014 Olympic Games. International Journal of Sport Management and Marketing, 15(5/6), 322-339. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSMM.2014.073209

Gillooly, L., Anagnostopoulos, C., & Chadwick, S. (2017). Social media-based sponsorship activation – A typology of content. Sport, Business and Management: An International Journal, 7(3), 293-314. https://doi.org/10.1108/SBM-04-2016-0016

Herrera-Torres, L., & Pérez Tur, Fernando & García-Fernández, Jerónimo & Fernandez, Jesus. (2017). El uso de las redes sociales y el engagement de los clubes de la Liga Endesa ACB. Cuadernos de Psicologia del Deporte, 17, 175-182. 

Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S.E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277-1288.

Hundt S., & Horsch A. (2019). Sponsorship of the FIFA world cup, shareholder wealth, and the impact of corruption. Applied Economics, 51(23), 2468-2491. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2018.1545082

IEG (2017). IEG’s guide to sposorship. https://www.sponsorship.com/ieg/files/59/59ada496-cd2c-4ac2-9382-060d86fcbdc4.pdf

IEG (2022). Activation Ratios Are Dead. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/activation-ratios-dead-ieg/

IOC (2022). Annual Report COI. https://bit.ly/3TXsxHH 

Jensen, J., Cobbs, J., & Turner, B. (2016). Evaluating Sponsorship through the Lens of the Resource-Based View: The Potential for Sustained Competitive Advantage. Business Horizons, 59, 163-173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2015.11.001

Kantar (2021). 10 Opportunities for Sports 2021. https://bit.ly/3JoNLsM

Kaushik, K., Mishra, A., & Dey, S. (2022). ‘The tweeting sponsor’: effect of a sponsor’s SNS message articulation/interactivity on consumers’ online response. European Sport Management Quarterly, 22(2), 227-250. https://doi.org/10.1080/16184742.2020.1776748

Kearney, Michael. (2019). rtweet: Collecting and analyzing Twitter data. Journal of Open-Source Software, 4. https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01829   

Kulczycki, W., Pfister, B., & Koenigstorfer, W. (2020). Adverse Effects When Partnering for Corporate Social Responsibility in the Context of FIFA World Cup Sponsorship. Journal of Global Sport Management, 5(4), 367-386. https//doi.org/10.1080/24704067.2018.1537680 

Lin, J.-S., & Pena, J. (2011). Are you following me? A content analysis of TV networks’ brand communication on Twitter. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 12(1), 17-29.

Lovejoy, K., & Saxton, G. D. (2011). Information, community, and action: how nonprofit organizations use social media. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17 (3), 337-353.

Madrigal, R., Bee, C., & LaBarge, M. (2005). Using the Olympics and FIFA World Cup to enhance global brand equity: A case study of two companies in the payment services category. In: J. A. Cornwell & T. B. Cornwell (Eds.), Global sport sponsorship (pp. 179-190). Berg.

Maldonado-Erazo, C. P., Durán-Sánchez, A., Álvarez-García, J., & Del Río-Rama, M.d.l.C. (2019). Sports sponsorship: scientific coverage in academic journals. Journal of Entrepreneurship and Public Policy, 8 (1), 163-186. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEPP-03-2019-106

Mastromartino, B., & Naraine, M.L. (2022). (Dis)Innovative digital strategy in professional sport: examining sponsor leveraging through social media. International Journal of Sports Marketing and Sponsorship, 23(5), 934-949. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSMS-02-2021-0032 

Millan, A., & Ball, M. (2012). The use of social media as a tool for consumer brands to leverage sponsorship of sporting events: a qualitative analysis. International Journal of Sales, Retailing and Marketing, 1(4), 27-39.

Miyazaki, A., & Morgan, A. (2001). Assessing Market Value of Event Sponsoring: Corporate Olympic sponsorship. Journal of Business Research, 41. https://doi.org/10.2501/JAR-41-1-9-15

Müller, M. (2015). What makes an event a mega-event? Definitions and sizes. Leisure Studies, 34(6), 627-642. https://doi.org/10.1080/02614367.2014.993333

Muntinga, D. G., Moorman, M., & Smit, E. G. (2011). Introducing COBRAs exploring motivations for brand-related social media use. International Journal of Advertising, 30(1), 13-46.

Naraine, M. L., Bakhsh, J. T., & Wanless, L. (2022/09//). Th e impact of sponsorship on social media engagement: A longitudinal examination of professional sport teams. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 31(3), 239-252. https://doi.org/10.32731/SMQ.313.0922.06

Nufer, G., & Bühler, A. (2010). How effective is the sponsorship of global sports events? A comparison of the FIFA World Cups in 2006 and 1998. International Journal of Sports Marketing and Sponsorship, 11(4), 33-49. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSMS-11-04-2010-B004

O’Reilly, N., & Horning, D. L. (2013). Leveraging sponsorship: The activation ratio. Sport Management Review, 16(4), 424-437.

Papadimitriou D., & Apostolopoulou A. (2009). Olympic Sponsorship Activation and the Creation of Competitive Advantage. Journal of Promotion Management, 15(1-2), 90-117. https://doi.org/10.1080/10496490902892754

Papadimitriou, D., Apostolopoulou, A., & Dounis, T. (2008). Event sponsorship as a value creating strategy for brands. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 17(4), 212-222. https://doi.org/10.1108/10610420810887563

Pegoraro, A., Scott, O., & Burch, L. M. (2017). Strategic use of Facebook to build brand awareness: A case study of two national sport organizations. International Journal of Public Administration in the Digital Age, 4(1), 69-87. https://doi.org/10. 4018/IJPADA.2017010105

Pérez-Seoane, J., Corbacho-Valencia, J. M., & Abuín-Penas, J. (2023). Mundial de Catar: autogol o éxito para los patrocinadores. Análisis de los videos publicados en YouTube y la respuesta de la audiencia. Revista Latina de Comunicación Social, 81, 76-96. https://www.doi.org/10.4185/RLCS-2023-2006

Portlock, A., & Rose, S. (2009). Effects of ambush marketing: UK consumer brand recall and attitudes to official sponsors and non-sponsors associated with the FIFA World Cup 2006. International Journal of Sports Marketing and Sponsorship, 10(4), 2-17. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSMS-10-04-2009-B002

Rival IQ (March 19th, 2023). Powerful social media analytics. No data scientist required. https://www.rivaliq.com/ 

Rohm, A., Kaltcheva, V. D., & Milne, G.R. (2013). A mixed-method approach to examining brand-consumer interactions driven by social media. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 7(4), 295-311.

Rutter, R., Nadeau, J., Aagerup, U., & Lettice, F. (2020). The Olympic Games and associative sponsorship: Brand personality identity creation, communication and congruence. Internet Research, 30(1), 85-107. https://doi.org/10.1108/INTR-07-2018-0324

Schönberner, J., & Woratschek, H. (2023). Sport sponsorship as a booster for customer engagement: the role of activation, authenticity and attitude. International Journal of Sports Marketing and Sponsorship, 24(2), 259-277. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSMS-05-2022-0098

Séguin, B., & O’Really, N. (2008). The Olympic Brand, Ambush Marketing and Clutter. International Journal of Sport Management and Marketing, 4(1-2), 62-84.

Stipp, H (1998). The impact of Olympic sponsorship on corporate image. International Journal of Advertising, 17(1), 75-87. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.1998.11104706

Stipp, H., & Schiavone, N. P. (1996). Modeling the impact of Olympic sponsorship on corporate image. Journal of Advertising Research, 36(4), 22-28.

Su, Y., Baker, B. J., Doyle, J. P., & Kunkel, T. (2020). The rise of an athlete brand: Factors influencing the social media following of athletes. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 29(1), 33-46. https://doi.org/ 10.32731/SMQ.291.302020.03

Synergy (20 November 2015). Sponsorship is dead, long live sponsorship. https://bit.ly/3xCnTXV

Uhrich, S., Koenigstorfer, J., & Gröppel-Klein, A. (2013). Leveraging sponsorship with corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Research, 67, 2023-2029. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.10.008

Weeks, C., Cornwell, B. T., & Drennan, J. (2008). Leveraging Sponsorships on the Internet: Activation, Congruence, and Articulation. Psychology and Marketing, 25, 637-654. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20229

Weinberg, B. D., & Pehlivan, E. (2011). Social spending: managing the social media mix. Business Horizons, 54(3), 275-282.

Whiting, A., & Williams, D. (2013). Why people use social media: a uses and gratifications approach. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 16(4), 362-369.

Witkemper, C., Lim, C. H., & Waldburger, A. (2012). Social media and sports marketing: examining the motivations and constraints of Twitter users. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 21(3), 170-183.

Yazdanparast A., & Bayar O. (2021). Olympic Sponsorships and Brand Value: An Empirical Analysis. Journal of Advertising, 50(2), 139-159. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2020.1856737

7.       ANNEX

 

Table 1. Activation analysis typology analysis table.

 

Type	Category	The purpose of these tweets is
Informing	Company promotion	purely promotional and can include overt sales-based communications, such as promoting followers to buy the brand’s products/services. These tweets fit with seeking product information as being a driver for brand-consumer social media interactions (Rohm et al., 2013)
	Sharing the news	to relay information to followers, in line with the information-seeking motivation for consumer use of social media (Whiting and Williams, 2013)
	Deal announcement	in informing the audience of the new sponsorship deal and thus echoes the social media consumption motivation of seeking timely information (Rohm et al., 2013)
	Activational promotion	promotional in the narrower context of sponsorship activations (rather than the broader company context as in “Company Promotion”). Therefore, it echoes the motivation of seeking information on promotions and events identified by Rohm et al. (2013)
	Event observations	informational, but with a greater emphasis on sharing the experience of being at an event rather than purely communicating the facts. These tweets are therefore providing real-time information and connecting with fans during an event, which were identified as key benefits of social media for sponsorship activation (Millan and Ball, 2012)
Entertaining	Playing games	While sponsor-driven games/quizzes could be activational, the overriding purpose of these tweets is to encourage participation for fun (whether the game/quiz is activational or not), thus reflecting the consumption of social media content to pass time (Witkemper et al., 2012) and escape from routine (Muntinga et al., 2011)
	Fun facts	As consumers want to “learn, laugh, discover [and]…be entertained” by sponsorship-related social media content (Synergy, 2011) the purpose of these tweets is to offer some short content which might interest or mildly surprise the audience, providing a form of entertainment rather than serious information
Rewarding	Prize competitions	to drive participation in the competition, with the incentive of a potential reward for participants (Rohm et al., 2013; Muntinga et al., 2011)
	Winners	to sit within the wider context of the competition and thus its potential for reward (Rohm et al., 2013)
	Rules	While these tweets are giving information, it is purely in the context of a competition and therefore linked with the notion of potential reward to the audience as a result of acting on the tweet content (Rohm et al., 2013;)
Interacting	Following recommendations	to facilitate the audience in their wider consumption of the sponsored event through X by recommending accounts they may be interested in. This echoes notions of “helping” as identified under social interaction by Muntinga et al. (2011)
	Follower greetings	to offer a general greeting to followers and thus they reflect the “bonding” messages used on social media for community building suggested by Lovejoy and Saxton (2011)
	Chit-chatting	to engender a sense of informal conversation with followers, whether or not that conversation is reciprocated. Therefore, these tweets echo the notion of “substituting real-life companionship” under Muntinga et al.’s (2011) category of integration and social interaction
	Wishing them luck	to express support for the athletes in a typically conversational manner and reflect the sponsor brands adopting a personal touch and “being human” (Weinberg and Pehlivan, 2011)
	Congratulations	to offer congratulations to participants after their success in an event. As with “Wishing them Luck” this category of tweet shows brands “being human” and adopting a personal touch in their communications (Weinberg and Pehlivan, 2011)
	Q&A	In line with the interactivity function of X use by athletes (Hambrick et al., 2010), the purpose of these is to facilitate interactions between athletes/other related individuals and the sponsor’s followers
	Participant messages	The purpose is to interact with X users who are in some way related to the sponsored event. As such, they reflect the notion of “dialogue” on social media put forward by Lovejoy and Saxton (2011)

 

Source: Based on Gillooly et al. (2017)

 

 

Table 4. Number and percentage of posts on X and Instagram for the Olympic Games (OG).

 

National Twitter account Toyota					Global Twitter account Toyota					National Instagram account Toyota					Global Instagram account Toyota					Total posts
Pre	Dur	Post	Tot.	OG	Pre	Dur	Post	Tot.	OG	Pre	Dur	Post	Tot.	OG	Pre	Dur	Post	Tot.	OG		OG
40	39	46	125	14	8	35	4	47	27	6	9	5	20	6	20	30	21	75	0	267	47
32	31.2	36.8	100	11.2%	17	74.4	8.6	100	57.4%	30	45	25	100	30%	32	40	28	100	0%		17.6%
National Twitter account Visa					Global Twitter account Visa					National Instagram account Visa					Global Instagram account Visa					Total posts
21	23	12	56	33	3	6	3	12	4	3	4	4	11	11	1	4	0	5	1	84	49
37	41	21.4	100	58.9%	25	50	25	100	33.3%	27.2%	36.3	36.3	100	100%	20	80	0	100	20%		58.3%
National Twitter account Allianz					Global Twitter account Allianz					National Instagram account Allianz					Global Instagram account Allianz					Total posts
47	44	40	131	18	22	14	16	52	5	10	10	6	26	10	7	7	2	16	3	225	36
35.8	33.5	30.5	100	13.7%	42.3	26.92	30.77	100	9.6%	38.4	38.4	23	100	34.6%	43.7	43.7	12.5	100	18.7%		16%
National Twitter account Airbnb					Global Twitter account Airbnb					National Instagram account Airbnb					Global Instagram account Airbnb					Total posts
53	55	43	151	2	18	11	7	36	7	0	0	0	0	0	21	17	21	59	6	246	15
35	36.4	28.4	100	1.3	50	30.5	19.4	100	19.4%	0	0	0	0	0%	35.5	28.8	35.5	100	10%		6.1%
National Twitter account Panasonic					Global Twitter account Panasonic					National Instagram account Panasonic					Global Instagram account Panasonic					Total posts
21	16	9	46	12	10	29	16	55	28	7	7	6	20	6	0	0	0	0	0	121	46
45.6	34.7	19.5	100	26%	18.1	52.7	29	100	50.9%	35	35	30	100	30%	0	0	0	0	0		38%
National Twitter account Deloitte					Global Twitter account Deloitte					National Instagram account Deloitte					Global Instagram account Deloitte					Total posts
14	20	13	47	1	68	64	39	171	0	3	2	1	6	1	15	11	7	33	5	257	7
29.7	42.5	27.6	100	2.1%	39.7	37.4	22.8	100	0%	50	33.3	16.6	10	16.6%	45.4	33.3	21.2	100	15%		2.7%
National Twitter account Samsung					Global Twitter account Samsung					National Instagram account Samsung					Global Instagram account Samsung					Total posts
0	0	0	0	0	14	9	13	36	0	8	9	6	23	1	6	10	10	26	9	85	10
0	0	0	0	0	38.8	25	36.1	100%	0%	34.7	39.1	26	100	4.3%	23	38.4	38.4	100	34.6%		11.7%
National Twitter account Bridgestone					Global Twitter account Bridgestone					National Instagram account Bridgestone					Global Instagram account Bridgestone					Total posts
21	24	4	49	41	21	74	41	136	64	7	6	2	15	11	5	13	7	25	18	225	134
42.8	49	8.2	100	83.7%	15.4	54.4	30.2	100	47.5	46.7	40	13.3	100	73.3%	20	50	30	100	72%		59.5%
National Twitter account Cocacola					Global Twitter account Cocacola					National Instagram account Cocacola					Global Instagram account Cocacola					Total posts
35	24	24	83	0	279	242	149	670	53	21	24	17	62	0	4	4	0	8	3	823	56
42.2	28.9	28.9	100	0%	41.6	36.1	22.2	100	7.9%	33.9	38.7	27.4	100	0	50	50	0	100	37.5%		6.8%
National Twitter account TOTAL   Global Twitter account TOTAL National Instagram account TOTAL Global Instagram account TOTAL Total posts 252 245 191 688 121 443 484 288 1,215 188 65 71 47 183 46 79 96 68 247 45 2333 400 36.6 35.6 27.6 100 17.5 36.4 39.8 23.7 100 15.4 35.2 38.8 25.6 100 34.5 31.9 38.8 27.5 100 18.2   17.4%

 

Source: Our compilation.

 

Table 5. Number and percentage of posts on X and Instagram for the FIFA World Cup (WC).

 

National Twitter account Adidas					Global Twitter account Adidas					National Instagram account Adidas					Global Instagram account Adidas					Total posts
Pre	Dur	Post	Tot.	WC	Pre	Dur	Post	Tot.	WC	Pre	Dur	Post	Tot.	WC	Pre	Dur	Post	Tot.	WC		WC
2	36	0	38	16	9	32	6	47	26	1	5	0	6	4	4	11	3	18	13	109	33
5.3	94.7	0	100	42.1%	19.1	68.1	12.8	100	55.3%	16.7	83.3	0	100	66.7%	22.3	6.1	16.7	100	72.2%		54.1%
National Twitter account Budweiser					Global Twitter account Budweiser					National Instagram account Budweiser					Global Instagram account Busweiser					Total posts
9	230	3	242	227	2	339	18	359	342	6	17	3	26	16	20	327	22	369	333	996	918
3.7	95	2.3	100	93.8%	0.6	94.4	5	100	95.3%	23.1	65.4	11.1	100	61.5%	5.4	88.6	6	100	90.2%		90.2%
National Twitter account Cocacola					Global Twitter account Cocacola					National Instagram account Cocacola					Global Instagram account Cocacola					Total posts
26	32	24	82	0	7	0	0	7	5	8	33	11	52	0	24	52	2	78	78	219	83
31.7	39	29.3	100	0%	63.6	0	0	100	63.6%	15.4	63.5	21.1	100	0%	30.8	66.6	2.6	100	100%		37.9%
National Twitter account Hi-Sense					Global Twitter account Hi-Sense					National Instagram account Hi-Sense					Global Instagram account Hi-Sense					Total posts
13	35	11	59	46	7	21	8	36	24	14	33	11	58	47	9	26	4	39	30	192	147
22	59.3	18.6	100	78%	19.4	58.3	22.2	100	66.7%	24.1	56.9	19	100	81%	23	66.7	10.3	100	76.9%		76.6%
National Twitter account Hyundai					Global Twitter account Hyundai					National Instagram account Hyundai					Global Instagram account Hyundai					Total posts
7	36	8	51	0	25	29	8	62	21	5	16	8	29	0	21	43	10	74	37	216	58
13.7	70.6	15.7	100	0%	40.3	46.8	12.9	100	33.9%	17.2	55.1	27.5	100	30%	28.4	58.1	13.5	0	50%		26.9%
National Twitter account Kia					Global Twitter account Kia					National Instagram account Kia					Global Instagram account Kia					Total posts
14	46	17	77	1	7	415	16	438	353	4	15	6	25	6	5	14	4	21	18	561	378
18.2	59.7	22.1	100	1.3%	1.5	94.8	3.7	100	83.1%	16	60	24	100	8%	21.7	60.9	17.4	100	87%		66.5%
National Twitter account McDonald’s					Global Twitter account McDonald’s					National Instagram account McDonald’s					Global Instagram account McDonald’s					Total posts
0	0	0	0	0	3	0	0	3	0	6	9	4	19	0	2	11	1	14	0	36	0
0	0	0	0	0%	100	0	0	100%	0%	31.6	47.4	21	100	0%	14.3	78.6	7.1	100	0%		0%
National Twitter account Visa					Global Twitter account Visa					National Instagram account Visa					Global Instagram account Visa					Total posts
4	10	4	18	0	3	1	0	4	0	0	1	1	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	24	0
22.2	55.6	22.2	100	0%	75	25	0	100	0%	0	50	50	100	0%	0	0	0	0	0%		0%
National Twitter account Vivo					Global Twitter account Vivo					National Instagram account Vivo					Global Instagram account Vivo					Total posts
7	19	13	39	22	0	0	0	0	0	5	10	5	20	7	12	24	10	46	27	105	56
17.9	48.7	33.3	100	56.4%	0	0	0	0	0%	25	50	25	100	35%	27	52.3	21.7	100	58.7%		53.3%
National Twitter account TOTAL   Global Twitter account TOTAL National Instagram account TOTAL Global Instagram account TOTAL Total posts 82 444 80 606 312 63 837 56 956 771 49 139 49 237 80 97 508 56 659 536 2458 1673 13.5% 73.2% 13.2% 100% 51.4% 6.5% 87.5% 5.8% 100% 80.6% 20.6% 58.6% 20.6% 100% 33.7% 18.1% 77% 8.5% 100% 81.3% 100% 69.1%

 

Source: Our compilation.

 

Table 6. Classification of posts about the Olympic Games.

 

Type	Category	Example:	No	%
Informing	Company promotion	¿Conoces todas las opciones de movilidad que nos acompañan en #Tokyo2020? 🏅  👉 Emiten un total de cero emisiones 👉 Promueven la movilidad inteligente. Nuestra mejor apuesta para alcanzar nuestra visión #BeyondZero, ¿cuál es tu favorito? Conócelos mejor https://t.co/ATRGjJ0NFY https://t.co/wBW5HA7Ri7	39	9.7%
	Sharing the news	@Netflix presenta la docuserie #NaomiOsaka, que repasa la vida profesional y personal de la exitosa tenista, y embajadora #Panasonic, incluida por la revista @TIME en la lista anual de las 100 personas más influyentes del mundo, en 2019 y 2020. ¡No os la podéis perder! 🍿🍿🍿 https://t.co/LAVmtz62K0	15	3.7%
	Deal announcement	A pesar de todo lo que hemos vivido hasta llegar a este momento, como Patrocinador Olímpico y Paralímpico Oficial, nos enorgullecemos de poder celebrar por fin la realización de los Juegos Olímpicos Tokyo 2020 que esta semana darán comienzo. #Tokyo2020	1	0.25%
	Activational promotion	Nuestros héroes @CarolinaMarin y @tindelapuente unieron sus deportes para superar un día más sus #imposibles. Ellos son un gran ejemplo de superación que nos sigue inspirando cada día. ¡Mucha fuerza! 💪🏻 #StartYourImpossible https://t.co/wzj2rICrEQ	75	18.7%
	Event observations	Cuando todos avanzamos juntos, nada es imposible. Estamos orgullosos de ser el partner de movilidad de los JJOO. Enhorabuena a todos los deportistas. ¡Tenemos ganas de vivir los Juegos Paralímpicos! #Tokyo2020 #EquipoToyota #StartYourImpossible (Foto de Getty) https://t.co/Pf54d8xrlE	54	13.5%
	Subtotal		188	47%
Entertaining	Playing games	Join the #StrongerTogetherChallenge on Samsung Health. You can participate in a walk with people from around the globe. Once you reach 250,000 steps, you’ll earn a digital badge to share on your SNS page. Bring the world together, because we are stronger together! ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ #Tokyo2020 #StrongerTogetherChallenge #DoWhatYouCant #Samsung * Samsung is a Worldwide Olympic Partner.	5	1.2%
	Fun facts	@CocaCola 11 ago. 2021 It’s all about the journey. Alex Morgan keeps working even when no one is watching. @alexmorgan13 #Olympics #Tokyo2020	5	1.2%
	Subtotal		10	2.5%
Rewarding	Prize competitions	@Toyota_Esp: ¿Quieres conseguir este vestido de @carolinamarin firmado en exclusiva por ella? 🏸 ¡Nos hemos unido a @badmintonESP para sortear 3 premios entre los seguidores de este deporte!  Abre este hilo para descubrir cómo participar. 👀👇🏻 #StartYourImpossible 📸 @badmintonphoto https://t.co/23a56bak7J	24	6%
	Winners
	Rules
	Subtotal		24	6%
Interacting	Following recommendations	Los deportistas españoles a seguir en los #JJOO de #Tokyo2020 según las aseguradoras  🔝Recomendaciones de  @Allianz_es, @AXASegurosEs,  @GrupoLiberty_es y @sanitas  ✍️🏼Por  @SergioSBarreda  #GrupoAseguranzaJJOO #Seguros #SeSalen https://www.grupoaseguranza.com/noticias-de-seguros/deportistas-espanoles-seguir-jj-oo-tokio-segun-aseguradoras	28	7%
	Follower greetings	Congratulations, @ryan_f_murphy! We’re proud to have you on #TeamBridgestone.	1	0.2%
	Chit-chatting	Del 23 de Julio al 8 de Agosto tienes una cita con los Juegos Olímpicos Tokyo 2020. Unos Juegos únicos que ya han hecho historia, súmate al sentimiento Olímpico y hazle llegar tu apoyo a los atletas estés donde estés ❣️ #Tokyo2020 https://t.co/rlGYoosHXD	5	1.2%
	Wishing them luck	Nuestro campeón judoca Niko Shera participará mañana a las 4:00 AM (hora española) en las Olimpiadas de #Tokyo2020. ¡Déjanos tu mensaje de ánimo a Niko en este hilo! 💪 #StartYourImpossible #EquipoToyota https://t.co/lqTVgl4yW1	23	5.7%
	Congratulations	Hoy @Valeromtb ha conseguido la medalla de bronce en la prueba de BTT XCO de los #JuegosOlímpicos de #Tokyo2020 tras una remontada épica. ¡Enhorabuena David! 🔥(Foto por: RFEC – PhotoGómezSport) @RFECiclismo #TeamEspCiclismo #StartYourImpossible https://t.co/xGKpvFSyrl	60	15%
	Q&A	¿Has estado siguiendo los #JJOO de #Tokyo2020? #TeamVisa	11	2.7%
	Participant messages	@CopeZaragoza ¡Muchas gracias por vuestra mención! Desde 1986 estamos comprometidos con el movimiento olímpico y este año si cabe aún más. ¡Les deseamos a todos los deportistas el mayor de los éxitos en #Tokio2020! 🥇	40	10%
	Subtotal		178	44.5%
Total			400

Source: Our compilation.

Tabla 7. Classification of posts about the FIFA World Cup.

 

Type	Category	Example	No	%
Informing	Activational promotion	Every four years something comes around that moves us all. Watch the world premiere of our ode to fans across the world and their love of the beautiful game. Over the next several weeks, our individual moments will become a collective movement. Help Kia amplify your passion and share your excitement with the world. #Kia #MovementThatInspires #KiaInspireTogether #FIFAWorldCup2022 #FIFAWorldCup	96	5.7%
	Sharing the news	Spotted! 🤩 Look who attended the opening celebrations of the @FIFAworldcup at Al Bayt Stadium in Al Khor! 💜 Brand ambassador and Team Century member #Jungkook. Let’s enjoy the FIFA World Cup™ together! Looking forward to more on-site events and the upcoming tournament! #GOTC	31	1.8%
	Deal announcement	@Budweiser es • 18 nov. 2022 « ¡Atención! y Se viene anuncio importante: @aLexBY11 firma este Mundial con nuestro Bud Creators Team S. Fichaje de altura para cerrar equipazo. Y viene con muchas ganas de saltar al campo #ElMundoEstáEnTusManos #BudXMundial	9	0.5%
	Activational promotion	Rolling up to the stadium in style. Throughout the FIFA World Cup™ the national teams have been traveling around Qatar in our GOTC buses. Each bus carries sustainable pledges on its body for everyone to see. #FIFA2022 #FIFAWorldCup #GOTC	284	16.9%
	Event observations	Iconic in the front IONIQ in the back. 😜 But remember to keep the eye on the prize at all times or things might get #messi.	193	11.5%
	Subtotal		613	36.6%
Entertaining	Playing games		8	0.47%
	Fun facts	In case you wanted to be a fly on the wall during filming👀 Behind the Scenes | FIFA World Cup™ 2022 Family Reunion | adidas	201	12%
	Subtotal		209	12.5%
Rewarding	Prize Competitions	who spotted this? 👀 ➡ here is how you can win today's match ball: https://adidas.onelink.me/ihha/mvkbuhz7	49	2.9%
	Winners	@Budweiser es 24 nov. 2022 Y los ganadores son..... @Waku1980 @JuanTomatera @ansaco04 @monikitavk @Felixvk89 ¡Enhorabuena a todos!	46	2.7%
	Rules		0	0%
	Subtotal		95	5.6%
Interacting	Following recommendations	welcome to the adidas YARD SALE. 📦 the place for the most unique items during this World Cup. 🤯 follow the link now, and who knows, you may soon be the owner of one of these products: https://adidas.onelink.me/ihha/s5o1kpz6	11	0.65%
	Follower greetings	@Budweiser  An unbelievable tournament. Amazing memories. Thank you to all the fans who participated in our #ReactionChallenge for the #WorldCup!	27	1.61%
	Chit-chatting	Starting tomorrow, share videos of your excitement and inspiration using #KiaInspireTogether and we’ll share them with the players and the world.	268	16%
	Wishing them luck	A message for @afaseleccion. All of Argentina believes in you. #BelievingIsMagic #FIFAWorldCup #TrophyTo	69	4.12%
	Congratulations	budfootball • 19 dic. 2022 The dream = reality The legacy = complete The world = #YoursToTakeCongratulations, Leo Messi #BringHomeTheBud #BroughtHomeT @budfootball • 19 dic. 2022	187	11.1%
	Q&A	Big matchup tonight 👀 Who do you believe in? #BelievingIsMagic #FIFAWorldCup #TrophyTour	78	4.6%
	Participant Messages	Repost from @abbydahlkemper ! TAG #KiaInspireTogether on videos cheering your FIFA World Cup™ team and get them shown in Qatar. By sharing your excitement, your cheers can become part of a collective movement. #FIFAWorldCup Submit yours here: https://upload.entribe.com/KiaInspireTogether	116	6.9%
	Subtotal		756	45.1%
Total			1,673	100%

 

Source: Our compilation.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS, FUNDING AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Contribuciones de los/as autores/as:

 

Conceptualization: Sanahuja Peris, Guillermo and Fernández Peña, Emilio. Software: Sanahuja Peris, Guillermo. Validation: Sanahuja Peris, Guillermo. Formal analysis: Sanahuja Peris, Guillermo, Fernández Peña, Emilio and Mut Camacho, Magdalena. Data curation: Sanahuja Peris, Guillermo. Writing-Preparation of the original draft: Sanahuja Peris, Guillermo. Writing-Revision and Editing: Fernández Peña, Emilio and Mut Camacho, Magdalena. Visualization: Sanahuja Peris, Guillermo. Supervision: Sanahuja Peris, Guillermo. Project management: Sanahuja Peris, Guillermo. All authors have read and accepted the published version of the manuscript: Sanahuja Peris, Guillermo, Fernández Peña, Emilio and Mut Camacho, Magdalena.

AUTHORS:

 

Guillermo Sanahuja-Peris

Universitat Jaume I de Castellón.

Guillermo Sanahuja Peris holds a PhD in communication sciences, a degree in advertising and PR from the University of Alicante, a Master's degree in marketing and communication management from the Ide-Cesem business school and a Master's degree in new processes and innovation in communication from the Universitat Jaume I. He currently works as a lecturer in the Department of Communication Sciences and Director of the Escola de Formació Esportiva (ESFE) at the Universitat Jaume I (Spain). Previously he worked as a strategic communication consultant (2012-2018) and as marketing and communication director at CD Castellón S.A.D. (2003-2010), collaborating with local, regional and national brands. In 2012 he defended his doctoral thesis studying corporate communication and marketing in professional sports clubs in Spain.

gsanahuj@uji.es 

Índice H: 6

Orcid ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5582-3395 

Scopus ID:  https://www.scopus.com/authid/detail.uri?authorId=57261435700 

Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.es/citations?hl=en&user=WUTaUdgAAAAJ 

ResearchGate: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Guillermo-Peris 

 

Emilio Fernández-Peña

Autonomous University of Barcelona.

Emilio Fernández Peña is Communication Reader at the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB) and head of its Olympic Studies Centre since December, 2009. He is the founder director of the Sport Research Institute UAB which joins 40 senior researchers from 12 different departments. This Institute analyses sport with a strong multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary approach. Emilio is doctor in Communication by the Basque Country University with Outstanding Award (2001). He is the creator and teacher of the Massive Online Course (MOOC) The Olympic Games and the Media which was launched in 2014 on Coursera and it has had more than 8,000 enrolled students since its creation. Dr. Fernández Peña has been the promoter and main designer of the new degree on Interactive Communication in the UAB.

emilio.Fernandez@uab.cat 

Índice H: 10

Orcid ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0534-6663 

Scopus ID: https://www.scopus.com/authid/detail.uri?authorId= 38961890700 

Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.es/citations?user=uiKnvSoAAAAJ&hl=es&oi=ao

 

Magdalena Mut-Camacho

University Jaume I de Castellón.

She is a professor in the Department of Communication Sciences. She is currently vice dean of the degree in Advertising and Public Relations in University's Jaume I (Spain). She obtained a doctorate in Business Communication. Her most salient scientific contributions in recent years have been the results obtained in research into professionals responsible for communication in corporations and institutions, into greater insights in the management of intangible values and also into corporate communication. Apart from approaching the line of research into communication professionals (DirCom) through articles in scientific journals, She also worked as PI in a research project with Asociación Dircom which led to the publication of a Communications guidebook. This was the first publication to define the profile of the communication professional.

mcamacho@uji.es 

Índice H: 12

Orcid ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1456-8567 

Scopus ID: https://www.scopus.com/authid/detail.uri?authorId= 55580234100 

Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.es/citations?hl=es&user=IFyIF8YAAAAJ

ResearchGate: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Magdalena_Mut-Camacho

 

^[1] Visa and the FIFA Women’s World Cup.