Flare Sci-Fi Forums: Advertisers and Education

This is topic Advertisers and Education in forum The Flameboard at Flare Sci-Fi Forums.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://flare.solareclipse.net/ultimatebb.php/topic/11/279.html

Posted by Jay the Obscure (Member # 19) on :

The following annoyed the hell out of me when I read it. And in my mind points out a very bad path that education in the United States, and indeed the country as a whole, is taking....

~~~~~

"At the same time that the nation has been kicking Joe Camel out the back door for corrupting kids, it has been opening wide the schoolhouse front doors to the purveyors of candy, soft drinks, fast food and snack food, often granting them exclusive run of the place and advertising bragging rights...."

"A Garden Grove elementary school's students assembled for a cereal maker's rally last year to collect certain box tops for money for the school. A Chula Vista school district cut a $4.45-million, 10-year exclusive Pepsi deal. (San Diego is about to go for a $23.5-million, 10-year deal making Pepsi the official and exclusive city soft drink.) I don't know whether it's a testament to the ethics or to the chaos at the Los Angeles Unified School District, the nation's second largest, that it hasn't yet cashed in big on the cola wars or other free lunch deals...."

~~~~

And in my mind one of the worst abuses of the above system, the the "anti-disparagement clause."

~~~~

"The Mazzoni measure would also ban a bit of language that advertisers have put into some school contracts--the "anti-disparagement clause," a kind of gag order barring school officials from speaking ill of the sponsor's product. A Georgia teenager who wore a Pepsi shirt on his school's Coke Day was suspended for a day."

To read the whole of the article go here

------------------
This anonymous clan of slack-jawed troglodytes has cost me the election, and yet if I were to have them killed, I would be the one to go to jail. That's democracy for you.
~ C. Mongomery Burns

Posted by Charles Capps (Member # 9) on :

Uh, so (in one example) the only drinks available would be Pepsi products (+ water, orange juice, etc), and the schools get $5 MILLION..... What's the problem? Extensive local coverage of this...

------------------
Avon: "You really do believe in taking risks, don't you?"
Tarrant: "Calculated risks."
Avon: "Calculated on what? Your fingers?"
-- Blake's Seven, Ultraworld

Posted by Baloo (Member # 5) on :

[Voice emenating from P.A. system:]

"...Followed by a pep rally for our league-leading varsity football team, sponsored by Pepsi. Remember it's a Pepsi world� and we're a Pepsi school�!"

------------------
You can only take offense if you brought some with you.
www.geocities.com/Area51/Shire/8641/

Posted by Jay the Obscure (Member # 19) on :

I'll tell you what I think the problem is, and it runs more deeply than I think the article goes. The question I keep coming back to is whether we trying to stimulate education or if we are allowing corporate greed to manifest itself in our educational system. Are we creating students or commercialized drones who march lock-step to the store for the latest product.

I have no major problem with a school or a district making a deal with say Coke to sell the product in the dending machines. Yet "Deals made by schools nationwide have slapped ads on the buses students ride, the school lunch menus they read, on hallway posters and textbook covers." go way to far.

And the sheer absurdity that a teenager who wore a Pepsi shirt on his school's Coke Day was suspended is beyond stupid. That public schools should seek out, and then be forced to depend on the funds, as surely they will be in time, is ludicrous.

I think that beyond the surface question of what extent we allow the coroprate greedy fingers around our collective necks, there is a very serious question of public and political apathy towards funding education in the United States, else school systems would not be signing deals with Coke for sponsorship.

Take also the state of children's televison and movies made for kiddies. They are mainly platforms for the corporations to market toys associated with the program.

This chemistry class brought to you by Snickers.

Posted by Saltah'na (Member # 33) on :

Corporate influence is a bad thing. When such private crap starts creeping into such public institutions such as Education and health care, the integrity of these institutions are undermined, as the rights of the people who use these institutions are overrun by the money-makers. How does this work? Say you're a university doctor involved in the creation of a drug that could cure a major disease. Funds for this project are sponsored by a private company. Only problem is that this drug has a possible side effect. Rather than go find a different solution, the company wants to push the drug through as quickly as possible, despite your warnings. The University fires you as a result. This is a PRIVATE CORPORATION which is using its money to bend a PUBLIC INSTITUTION's will. This is PRIVATE INFLUENCE running over ACADEMIC FREEDOM.

It has happened at my university several times in the last few years. That is why I am totally against any company paying money to get a foothold in any school, hospital, university, etc.

Oh, and this is why I hate right-wingers so much. They think that it is okay for such crap to happen around here.

------------------
I can resist anything.......
Except Temptation

[This message has been edited by Tahna Los (edited September 05, 1999).]

Posted by Jaresh Inyo on :

Anyone who was truly right-wing would understand that pushing through such a drug would lead to massive lawsuits. I'm right-wing, and I wouldn't market that product until it was safe. From an ethical, and financial, point of view, it's wrong and dangerous.

But really, the article was about ads in schools. I had ads in my school. For Peach Fuzz or Fuzzy Peach candies. And I think the fact that I can't remember the name of the candy should go a long way to showing how much of a drone I've been turned into. The only result was more money for my school, which was probably all gobbled up by "civil servents" anyway, but that's a topic for another thread.

------------------
Josh: I think they're getting to know each other a bit too well, if you catch my drift.
Me: Oh, I agree. I think they're spending too much time together, that is of course, if you catch my drift.
Asher: I think he's *ucking her, and he's cheating on his wife, and he's risking his marriage, and if his wife finds out about it she'll leave him and take their son, and his life will be ruined. If you catch my drift...

Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :

I have to say I probably trust most companies more than most school boards.

------------------
"Just because you're floating doesn't mean you haven't drowned."
--
They Might Be Giants

Posted by Feste on :

If the teenager's parents are litigious, they certainly have grounds to sue the school. That's a huge First Amendment no-no.

------------------
"There comes a time in every woman's life when the only thing that helps is a glass of champagne."

Bette Davis - Old Acquaintance

Posted by Saltah'na (Member # 33) on :

What I said was an example. What I am trying to say is that Children have the right to learn in an environment which is clear of any influence. That includes Candy companies and soft drinks. Rather than learning about Shakespeare and stuff, all the kids will be learning is the stuff that the Candy companies do.

I did hear of a school which had a deal with Nike which would allow advertising of expensive shoes in their schools. Two things point out in my mind: First is that Nike is making money off of ya with their grossly expensive footwear (which is only worth half of what it costs); and secondly, kids do not know how these shoes are made, how they are created from slave labour. This is definitely a poor influence. Had it not been for the parents' council, this kind of indifference would spread like a wildfire in our school system.

------------------
I can resist anything.......
Except Temptation

Posted by Kosh (Member # 167) on :

Im with Jay on this one. Schools should be free of this kind of crap. They finally made it illegal for kids to sell door to door in this state.

------------------
Outside of a dog, a book is a mans best friend. Inside of a dog, it's to dark to read. Groucho Marx

Posted by Baloo (Member # 5) on :

<RANT>As long as we're talking about ridding our schools of undue influences, let's talk about the one that bugged us the most when we were in school. I refer, of course, to teachers.
Mind you, these "teachers" are trying to indoctrinate us into society, not for our own good, but for the good of "society", and ultimately, the Corporations. Let's face it, folks -- schools are a government plot to suck our brains out and replace them with the phrases "Yes, boss; No, Boss; Right away, boss."
It may come as a complete surprise to many of you, but the government pays large sums to our schoolss right now! No, really! Don't look at me that way. It's true! And just what do you suppose the government is expecting for it's many "public school" dollars? Let's see, would they want free-thinking iconoclasts who are willing to use facts to draw conclusions? Or perhaps what they really want is someone who will sit down, shut up, and turn to the same page everyone else is on?
I won't tell you what to think, but I think you get the picture anyway</RANT>

On a more serious note, I have been exposed to advertising of one sort or another for most of my life. I think I have learned that the sponsor for any product is not interested in telling you the truth if he thinks telling you anything else is gonna convince you to part with your money quicker. I think we have all met the few wierdos who insist that no advertiser would lie, and I'm certain that most of us know a sales pitch when we hear one.

So what's the beef? Let Nike, Coke, Kleenex and Miller pay for books, buildings and utilities for schools. If you don't spend all your money on some sponsor's product just because they advertise during your favorite program, then why is it sinister for them to try to get some exposure to a group that is as cynical as they come (high-schoolers)?

Of course, if they're gonna pay, they're gonna play, too. I would find it difficult to believe that heads did not roll and that money (or product) wasn't forked over when the student wore a Pepsi shirt on "Coke day". In any case, I'm certain that Pepsi would be more than happy to raise the First Amendment banner in defense of this poor, put-upon student who prefers their product.

--Baloo

------------------
We are born naked, wet, and hungry.
Then things get worse.
www.geocities.com/Area51/Shire/8641/

[This message has been edited by Baloo (edited September 05, 1999).]

Posted by Feste on :

Baloo - I'm shocked that you're so cynical about a ravenous corporate giant like Pepsi. I'm sure their executives were devastated when a member of the Pepsi Generation suffered the violation of his First Amendment rights.

------------------
"There comes a time in every woman's life when the only thing that helps is a glass of champagne."

Bette Davis - Old Acquaintance

Posted by Jaresh Inyo on :

Tahna, what would make you think that we would have what we learn dictated by the companies? That is incredibly stupid. There's a bit of a difference between having a sign on the side of my bus and having corporate bosses tell me what to learn. Come on!

Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :

Money talks. (But it can't sing and dance, and it can't walk.)

Yikes, did I just type that?

Anyway, where exactly is the line between corporate sponsorship and overt corporate control? Don't our children have the right to learn in an environment free of such crass commercialism? I mean, I'm not saying that sponsorship is wrong. After all, I went to a Pepsi school. Our greatest rival was Zillah, which just happened to be a Coke school. I drink nothing but Pepsi, and wouldn't touch Coke. Oftentimes our two schools would come dang close to out and out violence. Coincidence? Most likely.

I think you can have sponsorship without problems. But where does it end? How long before the school isn't just sponsored by Pepsi, but run by them too? After all, we see a great surge towards privatization in society. Companies to run Social Security, companies to pick up the garbage. Companies to run the schools, too? Would students learn about the dangers of fossil fuels at Exxon High School? Something to think about, anyway.

------------------
"Just because you're floating doesn't mean you haven't drowned."
--
They Might Be Giants

[This message has been edited by Sol System (edited September 06, 1999).]

Posted by Saltah'na (Member # 33) on :

Sol: EXACTLY MY POINT. Jaresh, what do YOU think? I bet that your answer would be "It ain't gonna happen". But the real question is, how far will these companies go?

Letse now. At the University of Toronto, we have the "Scotiabank" Information Commons, the "Joseph Rotman" school of Management (Rotman is a right-wing businessman), some institution named after Peter Munk (another right winger, and President of Barrick corp, another Big Business). Now the one involving Munk is interesting. He's a pal of Former US prez George Bush, who recently got an honourary Doctorate here at U-of-T. I wonder whose idea it was to give such a degree to Bush in the first place.........

The last straw in my mind is something involving Conrad Black (newspaper magnate and ANOTHER right winger). I heard he said something about anyone who doesn't support the right-wing agenda "should be publically horsewhipped".

Now, please try to explain to ME that companies are not having an influence on our public institutions.........

------------------
I can resist anything.......
Except Temptation

Posted by Jaresh Inyo on :

You're right, Tahna. I don't think it will happen. There are too many checks and balances in the system for that to happen. The government decides the curriculum, and the government isn't private. In fact, the government defines public.

And about Bush, really, who cares? Did he get the degree because of his friend? Probably? Does it matter? Absolutely not. What difference does it make? Besides, Bush was the President of the United States. I'd be concerned if some guy no one had ever heard of was given a degree in the field of leading a super-power, but that ain't the case. Besides, our Prime Minister recently got an honourary doctorate from some university in Poland. Maybe he's sponsoring them, eh?

Oh, yeah, about Conrad Black. Say about him what you will, hell, even I think he's an asshole, but I respect him as a business man. Could either of us accomplish what he did? That man is employing thousands of Canadians, so lets cut him a little slack. He has a right to say whatever the hell he wants. It's mentioned in that little thing called "The Constitution." People are always bitching about Harris, and does anyone freak out? Everyone has a right to their own opinion. And everyone also has a right to strongly disagree with the others opinion.

Posted by Saltah'na (Member # 33) on :

Re: Bush- I won't say why the University thinks he deserved that doctorate, nor will I say why many others believe that he shouldn't have deserved that degree. But just after the intention to give him the doctorate was announced, Peter Munk, along with Barrick Co. gave a donation to the University of Toronto (in the millions of dollars) in exchange for his name on an institution. Many people believe that this deal came with many strings attached, those including Munk having a say on what goes on in that institution, where the money goes, and of course, provided that U-of-T keeps its promise to give that degree to Bush. When Universities start giving degrees away for cash, as this scheme implies, we have to take a hard look at what's going on here.

As for Conrad Black, the question is not about him as a businessman or an employer, it is about his character. I believe his comment about horsewhipping anyone who doesn't follow the right-wing agenda says alot, does it?

Tell me Jaresh, what do you think about that so-called "Anti-Disparagement" Clause which suspended that student for a day? Justified or not? Now what do you think about Advertising in Schools?

------------------
I can resist anything.......
Except Temptation

[This message has been edited by Tahna Los (edited September 06, 1999).]

Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :

If you have three Pepsis and drink one, how much more refreshed are you?

Pepsi?

Partial credit!

------------------
"Ray...the next time someone asks you if you're a god you say 'Yes!'"
-Winston Zeddmore

Posted by Jay the Obscure (Member # 19) on :

I think this whole issue signals two things. Firstly, that the government and the public in general don't give a hoot about education. Until someone runs for public office and then it's all about photo ops (like Clinton today standing in front of the broken down trailer classroom to deride the Republican tax cut) or making the campaign promise to become the "education president" and then falling asleep in the Oval Office chair. This apathy is evident in the amount of money allocated to public education that brings about at least some dependance on coporate sponsorship.

Secondly, it speaks to the fact that we are a possession focused society. That is clear when the coporate folks think that by hanging a sign for Nike in front of me then I will demand these cool shoes made by Indonesian sweat shop labor paid a few bucks a day be on my feet this instant so I can be in with the crowd. Bah! The more you possess, the more you are possesed and the coporations want to make good little consumers out of us while we are young.

Think about this as well, the increased money that has gone into the prison systems of late with the new "crack-down" on crime is misplaced in that it deals with the social problems after the horse is out of the barn so to speak. The money would be better spent on dealing with social ills before they are started whether than warehousing in prision those we could have saved if given the chance.

Posted by Kosh (Member # 167) on :

Psyliam: You may or may not be more refreshed, but what a caffine rush!!

------------------
Outside of a dog, a book is a mans best friend. Inside of a dog, it's to dark to read. Groucho Marx

Posted by Jaresh Inyo on :

Not justified, of course. It reminds me of something I'd do, actually. But I don't think that should mean that no school can accept private money. And do you really think that Pepsi had some shady conspiracy to get that guy suspended? It sounds more like the school was cracking down on independant thought, which I've seen happen personally.

Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :

Strangely, I've always found that tea helps me stay awake far better than Coke.

So, Sol, if, during your 'Coke and Coke only' phase, you were out, and thirsty, and there was a can machine that had only Pepsi, would you shun that machine, and go thirsty?

Oh, and has anyone read Red Dwarf - Infinity welcomes careful drivers? One of these days, coke will do that...

------------------
"Why can we never meet anyone nice?"
"Why can we never meet anyone who can shoot straight?"
-Lister and the cat

Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :

You've got it backwards. I drink only Pepsi, and shun Coke.

------------------
"Just because you're floating doesn't mean you haven't drowned."
--
They Might Be Giants

Posted by Jay the Obscure (Member # 19) on :

So if you went to a Coke school then there would be litigation in the works, eh Sol?

Posted by Cargile (Member # 45) on :

Pepsi sucks.

Enjoy Coke.

------------------
"I came upon a wedding, good old families had contribed.
Bethlaham the bride-groom, Babylon the bride.
Great Babylon was naked, ah she stood there trembling for me.
And Bethlaham enflamed us both, like a shy one at some orgy.
And when we fell together, all our flesh was like a veil.
But I had to draw aside to see the serpent eat its tail.
Some women wait for Jesus, and some women wait for Cain.
So I hang upon my alter, and I hoist my axe again.
And I take the one that finds me back to where it all began.
When Jesus was the honeymoon, and Cain was just a man.
And we read from pleasant Bibles, that are bound in blood and skin,
But the wilderness is gathering all its children back again."
excerpt from the song "Last Year's Man"
By Leonard Cohen.

Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :

Oh yeah? Well, Coke is only for pansies and...uh...other...pansies? Ah, to hell with it.

------------------
"Just because you're floating doesn't mean you haven't drowned."
--
They Might Be Giants

Posted by Jay the Obscure (Member # 19) on :

So, this is what we're down to? Name calling? Anti Coke slathering?