It certainly seems to be changing the nature of sport and public spectacles. I was taken with this story from the UK about (allegedly) the most recent incursions on the rights of sponsors over the freedom of individuals at the World Cup in Germany. Now, it is certainly the case that as the public demands bigger and better sporting spectacles (oh - does it? or is that some radical assumpiton?), that sponsorship money is required to meet that need. And as an investment, a sponsor has a reasonable right to get return on that investment. And, finally, that so-called 'ambush' or 'guerilla' marketing is aimed at undermining the legitimate sponsor's investment.
But I reckon I'd be pretty pissed off if I wore some old thing that I had owned for ages, that simply happened to have a rival company's name on it, and said item was confiscated. By which I mean stolen. Simply taken at face value, the story as reported to me indicates a gross diminution of the individual's freedom in favour of corporate clout. That's an easy accusation to make: does it stand up?
What do people think?