Mike Hosking: No issues with KFC sponsorship

KFC are sponsoring the rugby league world cup. Photo / File

Opinion

I have no problem with KFC sponsoring the rugby league world cup.

But Consumer New Zealand do.

Consumer New Zealand argue that by having fried chicken sponsoring the rugby league world cup we're all going to eat heaps of chicken and chips and potato and gravy and get fat and then get diabetes and then have a heart attack and die.

Well they didn't quite say that but they said something equally as stupid.

They said the sponsorship would get kids addicted. Which of course it won't.

Why? Because KFC has been here a while and everyone knows what they do, where they are and how to get it. And they either buy it, or they don't.

Sponsorship is not about addicting people to anything. It's about image. It's about market share. It's about positioning.

The Warriors have a liquor sponsor ... I don't think Warriors fans have become addicted.

Fast food is not tobacco, despite the angsty trying to tie the two together. Fast food doesn't kill you - it only kills you if you swim it. Sort of like a car kills you if you drive it drunk really fast and wrap it round a lamp post. The rest of the time it's just transport.

Part of why the KFCs and Maccas and Wendys and all the other chains get targeted is because they're easy pickings. We eat fish and chips and no one picks on them because they're little businesses on the corner with no head office. Big business is a soft target.

And, yes, in a way it does seem to a degree at odds that elite athletes and high-powered sporting events should mingle with junk food.

But go tell that to Coca Cola, who've been hooked into the Olympics for ever.

Somewhere in the old sponsorship debate we need to play a part. Somewhere, there needs to be a bit of self responsibility.

These products in and of themselves are not the end of the world and as such they need to be allowed to trade like any other company.

Can Chelsea sponsor sport, or is sugar out?

What about chocolate? Cadbury is a big global player. Are they allowed in on the action or not?

Why don't we pick on car manufacturers who produce carbon and are wrecking the atmosphere.

Where do you want to start and stop?

Who's acceptable and who isn't and given they're all perfectly legal companies, who decides?

And who decides that they decide?

And here's the simple reality of all of this: sponsorship pays the bills. In many cases, if it wasn't for the sponsor, it wouldn't be happening - so make mine a family pack.