UFC 144 Results: Do Corn Nuts Show That the UFC Has Gone Too Far with Sponsors?
The UFC now has an official corn snack.
You can add that to the official tire, official malt beverage and the other dozen or so "official" products endorsed by the UFC for money.
Sponsorships aren't inherently bad.
In fact, they're generally a good thing. If a company wants to pay for brand exposure via putting their logo in the Octagon or getting a plug in the broadcast, why shouldn't the UFC accept that and take the money?
They should. It's good for the UFC and ultimately good for the fans and fighters.
However, sometimes it gets excessive.
Obviously, the UFC has no control over what companies offer to sponsor their broadcasts, although they can control who they accept.
There was nothing wrong with accepting the CornNuts sponsorship at all, it's just weird that the marketing gurus at CornNuts think that the male 18-34 demographic is in need of a corn snack (although, I guess the joke is on me since I'm in that demographic and I'm now writing about CornNuts...)
No, the real problem is how the UFC sometimes goes about putting these sponsorships into practice.
There were plugs for sponsors during the main event. There should be a cardinal rule against this as it makes the sport and the UFC itself seem cheap and tawdry.
Could you imagine if broadcasters were plugging sponsors during the last plays of Super Bowl XLVI? It would kill the gravity and drama of the moment; it would cheapen it.
The same thing happens when fans hear Mike Goldberg's recorded voice-overs telling us what to buy. How can we really appreciate the moment when we are being bombarded with advertisements?
If the UFC wants to be seen as the NFL of MMA, advertising plugs during the main event need to stop.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?