Even ADWEEK is disgusted by how exploited Olympic athletes are!

ADWEEK is a weekly publication that covers all sorts of media markets from print to internet.

ADWEEK specializes in covering the relationships between big business and their creative agencies so both sets of corporations are friends of ADWEEK.

Hence, like the old saying goes, " Only Richard Nixon could go to China," only ADWEEK can out exploitation of the Olympic athlete:

Ann Killion writes:

"...one of America’s top steeplechase competitors, Ben Bruce (who has bunked at [Nick] Symmonds’ place in Eugene, Ore.), was forced to go on food stamps after failing to convince Nike to increase his meager stipend. ..." 

"...To make up the shortfall, synchronized swimmers in California work shifts at a Santa Clara bingo hall. ..." 

This spring, a group of 20 Olympic athletes, including former greats Mark Spitz, Dara Torres and Jackie Joyner-Kersee, sued TOP sponsor Samsung for using their names and images without permission in the company’s much-publicized Genome Project. The Facebook app allows fans to see how they’re connected to famous Olympians past and present. But they say the company never asked for the rights to use their images and names. [...] “I would have thought someone in the room, at some point, would have said, ‘I think we need to get written consent from the athletes,’” says attorney Rich Foster 

[Link]

But how much money are we talking about here? How much revenue is being generated off the backs of the athletes? The ADWEEK article states "... The Olympics will generate $6 billion to $7 billion, possibly more, in sponsorship and advertising revenue. ..."

Although these publications and blogs write articles decrying exploitation, a hand full of Athletes like Usain Bolt, Michael Phelps, or the "dream team" are millionaires and they have no reason to be an advocate for the poorly paid athlete. The only way change will be effected is if the athletes as a huge collective body refused to participate. Read the article!