Misdirected Responsibility

Maria Sharapova has launched a range of sweets that seem to have ruffled a few feathers.

On the surface I can understand why: The public seemed to have adopted the opinion that athletes only consume wholesome, nutrient rich foods and that they should therefore be nutritional role models. Some argue that sports stars have a disproportionately large influence on consumer behaviour, including that of children, so the promotion of unhealthy foods is inappropriate.

It is of my personal opinion that massive, well established brands are more likely to influence consumer behaviour – especially those that sponsor massive international sports competitions… But I digress.

The public unfortunately forget that athletes are allowed a break too.

According to Sharapova, she’s had a sweet tooth since she was a child and lollies were an incentive for a particularly good training session. She doesn't claim that her sweets contribute to one’s ‘five-a-day’. She doesn't make any claims that the sweets are in anyway beneficial to one’s health. More importantly, the name of the sweets – Sugarpova - is a giveaway as to what the sweets are composed of.

Whether or not the public are willing to accept this, the fact remains that the responsibility is on individuals to make smart choices regarding what they eat.

That said, what Sugarpova has shown us is that if you are in industry, and you generate an income from something that is not in the spirit of that industry, you leave yourself open to criticism.