Iditarod ‘gag order’ helps shield sponsors from musher criticism

Thanks to a new “personal conduct policy” Iditarod mushers this year aren’t allowed to say anything negative about the race or its sponsors until 45 days after the event is over. According to race marshal Mark Nordman, the rule was put in place to ensure mushers treat the race with “respect.”

Nordman said the Iditarod isn’t a place to make political statements, that the new rule came from the mushers themselves and that other professional sports have similar rules in place preventing their athletes from speaking out.

The Iditarod hasn’t said there were any specific instances that led to the rule, and Nordman said it’s simply a commonsense approach to protecting the race’s brand.

“This is just something to preserve what we do,” he told reporters at a pre-race media briefing.

Over the years, some mushers have chosen to make political statements, including those who have publicly supported sober living and anti-mining causes. In the past, racers have openly backed political candidates, and this year, Kasilof musher Monica Zappa announced her endorsement of Bernie Sanders for president just before the race. That endorsement has been allowed, as the race committee hasn’t deemed it to be against the race or its sponsors.

It’s likely the rule was imposed at least in part as a way to short-circuit any potential bad press for sponsors, who pay thousands of dollars to be associated with the world-famous 1,000-mile dogsled race from Willow to Nome.

That makes sense for the Iditarod, and from a public relations standpoint the rule seems like a good way to keep mushers from saying something that would embarrass the race and jeopardize its sponsors. After all, the race could be in real trouble if someone started nit picking at the companies that lend financial support.

For example, race officials would probably not want anyone pointing out that sponsors Alaskan Brewing Co. and Jack Daniels contribute to the scourge of alcoholism in Alaska, a state with one of the highest rates of alcohol abuse in the nation. These companies’ products are considered so dangerous that they’re banned from many rural Alaska communities — including parts of the race trail itself. It wouldn’t be good for business if a sobriety advocate wondered aloud why these companies are allowed to sponsor the race while their products are outlawed in four of this year’s checkpoints.

It could also be troublesome for the Iditarod if a musher said something bad about, say, Donlin Gold or ExxonMobil, two of the race’s major sponsors. For an event that brands itself as the ultimate wilderness adventure, it might not look good if a musher spoke up about the impact these companies have on Alaska’s environment. Exxon, for example, is responsible for spilling at least 10 million gallons of crude oil into Prince William Sound in 1989, one of the worst environmental disasters in history. As for Donlin, the company wants to build a massive mine in the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta. It would be a problem for race officials and for Donlin if a musher wondered aloud why a company that plans to build an open pit mine in the middle of the Alaska wilderness has its name on an event that so famously celebrates the great outdoors.

Companies sponsor the Iditarod to earn good publicity for their brands. That doesn’t work if mushers start speaking out about the hypocrisy of alcohol companies sponsoring a race that runs through dry villages or mining companies attaching their names on an event whose trademark is the pristine country it traverses.

These sponsors are vital to ensuring the race has a healthy bottom line, and the new rule is a good way to prevent anyone from saying something that could potentially embarrass them.