When contacted for comment, McDonald's issued the following statement:

"McDonald's is proud of our long-time sponsorship of the Olympic Games. We believe in the spirit of the Games and their unique ability to engage the world in a way that is constructive, positive and inspirational. Our focus has been and will continue to be on supporting the athletes, their teams, and the power of the Olympic Games to reinforce excellence, unity and achievement among people the world over.

"Concerning political issues, these need to be resolved by governments and international bodies such as the United Nations where they can most effectively drive discussions, diplomacy and help speed solutions.

"Regarding Tibet, our focus continues to remain on the Games and the athletes, and we hope that a peaceful resolution can be reached for all parties concerned."

Dream for Darfur is another advocacy campaign targeting Olympic sponsors to speak out against China's policies. The group seeks to use the Olympic Games as a point of leverage to encourage the Chinese government to convince the Sudanese government to allow United Nations peacekeeping troops to enter the war-torn Darfur region. China has been accused of continuing to support the Sudanese regime even as civilians are killed in the western part of the country.

"We have this one small window of opportunity in which we can make a difference and get our message across," says Ellen Freudenheim, corporate outreach director for the organization. "That window is closing when the games are over. We're asking them to raise their voices about this genocide."

Last year, Dream for Darfur issued a report card grading each of the corporate sponsors on their corporate responsibility responses to China's support of Sudan. McDonald's received a C, Coca-Cola was given a D, and Visa got an F.

Freudenheim says if the sponsors continue to remain silent, she anticipates demonstrations at their company headquarters. A separate campaign, Turn Off for Darfur, is encouraging Olympic viewers to turn off their advertisements during the games if the sponsors take no action.

But Peter Shankman, founder of Shankman Consulting, a marketing, public relations, and crisis management firm based in New York City, says despite the criticism they are receiving, the sponsors are handling the situation as best they can.

"It's the only thing they can do," he says. "They have put a fortune into this already. I guarantee they're not too happy about their sponsorship right now, but at this point, to pull out, there's no way they could save face."

The sponsors also have a vested interest in playing nice with China, he says.

"The Olympics will blow over in a few months," Shankman says. "What's not going to blow over is that China has billions of consumers."

Moreover, Shankman says he doubts that the sponsors will be significantly hurt by the protests and criticism.

"So far, nothing about these protests has shown me anything that would make me think anybody is going to be hurt at all," he says.

So what does this have to do with quick-service restaurants themselves?

"I would imagine there's going to be some promo programs in some of those outlets leading up to the Olympics," says David Chapman, CEO of 919 Marketing, a North Carolina–based marketing agency. "Fast-food restaurants are big on tying into topical events, and they're going to have to think about that very carefully."

He says pulling out promotions could be costly, and sponsors and restaurants should have contingency plans in place.

But Paul Sickmon, president of Knox Sports Marketing, a sports sponsorship management and negotiation company based in Tampa, Florida, says there's no telling what could happen between now and the Games this summer.

"It's too early to determine whether the sponsors are going to react or should react," he says. "We have to wait and see."