49. The Alliance for Sponsorship Freedom

(unpublished)
27 February, 1997

As an artist, and non-profit cultural events producer whose thirty-year cigarette consumption required an involuntary $25,000 sponsorship of tobacco companies, I object to the advertisement paid for by the The Alliance for Sponsorship Freedom. (National News A10A, 26 February, 1997) . Given that the largest public subsidies for culture have always been in corporate tax deductions for advertising costs, perhaps Molsons, du Maurier, Benson & Hedges et al should sponsor the arts, sports and entertainment events listed in the ad. without expectation of further reward. (I’ve already helped pay for these events at least twice)
Have we always needed tobacco or beer sponsorships to publicly set off a few fireworks, screen a week of movies, parade a catwalk, or burn a little rubber? In this debate over the “economic and cultural impact” of Bill C-71, tobacco industry representatives now claim that a prime purpose of a film or dance festival is to raise significant revenues for municipalities. Speaking of collateral damage, the employment-concerned artist, athletic and entertainment organisation members of the Alliance should ask themselves to what degree are they implicitly supporting the erosion of local arts and cultural ownership, community purpose and arms-length public funding by backing the threatening demands of their philanthropically unreliable corporate friends. “World-class” events may be the only circuit for indy car drivers and emerging tennis champions, but artists are supposed to want more and know better.