This is our final presentation of the material

For the next several pages you will find our final presentation on Channel One advertising and it's appropriateness in the classroom. When reading through the blog, please understand that you will be reading it backwards because of the way the postings are arranged. If you would like to start at the beginning, please scan 3 or 4 pages back and start from there. Also, the posts presented on the final pages are abridged versions of lengthier arguments we have proposed. Those pieces can be found in the comments section of each argument.  

We hope you enjoy.

-Pat, Jeanne, Grace, and Hauwa

Conclusion: Wrap Up of Channel One

Channel One's presence in schools is not appropriate in the classroom environment due to its commercialism. Shown in almost half of the U.S. middle schools and high schools, Channel One is not the daily news show its owners claim. Rather, Channel One is simply a promotional vehicle for its sponsors' products. It is true that schools have the option to enter into a contract with Channel One. However, with the recent explosion of technology and its educational benefits, it is perfectly understandable that less fortunate schools enters into these contracts to receive an upgrade in technology. According to Channel One's advertising policy, the ads presented through this program will be "truthful and tasteful". Through studies and analysis of this program, it is clear that Channel One has not lived up to its policy. Although portrayed as a news program, Channel One seems to be heavy on the fluff/ads and light on the news. Although there is potential for teachers to engage students in classroom discussions of current events shown on Channel One, this rarely occurs as the program airs during non-instructional class periods. To many, Channel One has not added value to students academics and has mostly brought up issues concerning wasted class time and taxpayers' dollars, its emphasis on materialistic values, promotion of unhealthy messages, etc among parents, educators, and policymakers. Originally started in New York, it has recently been banned from all New York public schools and other states such as Oregon and California soon followed. Taking all of this into consideration, what does this tell us about Channel One's educational benefits? Although some may argue a number of points to support this program ,it is clear that it is not appropriate for classroom learning.

Argument 4: Organizations For & Against Channel One + State Bans on Channel One

Reaction to [Channel One] was both swift and passionate. "A friend of mine called me and he went, 'Commercials in school televisions? You out of your mind?'" recalls Ed Winter, a former executive producer of Channel One who now heads his own marketing firm. "'You just declared war on education.'" The controversy soon spread nationwide, and both California and New York banned Channel One from their classrooms
~ PBS Frontline.


Main Points:

• Institutions and arguments in favor of Channel One are mostly coming from the company itself and lobbyists.
  
• Institutions and arguments against Channel One are coming from parties composed of legislators, parents, teachers, and civilians.
  
• Several states have already moved to ban Channel One from entering public schools.
  

More In Depth:
Typical arguments in favor of Channel One include the following:
Channel One news programming goals claim to support these 5 educational goals:
              a. Enhance cultural literacy
              b. Promote cultural thinking
              c. Provide common language & shared experience
              d. Provide relevance and motivation  
              e. Strengthen character and build a sense of responsibility

• The producers claim that it increases children's public-affairs knowledge
  
• Channel One is part of the media literacy movement: more and more health advocates and scholars argue that in a media-saturated society, educators must provide young people with the ability to understand visual elements and message subtexts that are communicated to them in media message
  
• Channel One advocates assert that it provides young people with news information in an enlightening and age-appropriate style, and its Web site promises everything from "issues in the news to what happens in school" (www.channelone.com).
  
• Some studies have shown that male students, high academic performers, older students, and those who discuss Channel One with teachers and parents are more likely to benefit from the programming.
  

Typical arguments against Channel One include the following:

• Critics argue that Channel One accomplishes little beyond providing a captive audience for teen-targeted advertising, forcing children to watch ads
  
• Channel One wastes precious time in schools. Schools showing Channel One spend the equivalent of one full week each school year watching Channel One, including nearly one class day watching ads.
  
• Channel One misuses tax dollars spent on schools.
  
• Channel One—not parents or school boards—chooses its ads and program content, taking the parents’ say on what affects their children’s lives.
  

Banning Channel One from Public Schools:

• When Channel One was in its early stages, the owner, Whittle, spent 6 months lobbying to obtain access to New York State’s student market, the second largest in the U.S.

In New York State, Whittle has also had to contend with the ardent and unwavering opposition of the State Commissioner of Education, Thomas Sobol. "What message would we send to students if we removed the ban?" Mr. Sobol asked today. "That we value you as consumers more than we value you as students."                 ~NY Times

• California has also banned Channel One
  
• In 2001, Seattle began to phase out Channel One news in middle schools and high schools by the end of 2004-05 school year.
  

After reviewing the business side, the content, and the effects of Channel One, we must wonder which institution is on the side of the students' best interests. From the analysis of the organizations that are for and against Channel One, it seems like the business commercial interests are overwhelmingly biased by their personal interests and gains. To the point where any content can be manipulated and claimed useful to the student and the advertisements used as educational tools, and not as the influential mechanisms that they are. As for the states and schools that have banned Channel One, they deserve a round of applause for holding to their convictions.


~ Chin-Shan Jeanne Lee


Please look in the comments section for more information.

Argument 3: Channel One's Many, Many Issues

Who would’ve thought that a simple 12 minute program designed to provide an educational service to update students on current events would lead to so many problems? What was a brilliant idea for its creators and sponsors has turned into virtually a nightmare for parents, educators, and policy makers. If someone listed every single Channel One issue, the list would probably be endless. However after much research and analysis, the main issues include the following:

• Wasted valuable class time
  
• Undermining of public school system/Emphasis on materialistic values
  
• Wasted tax payer dollars/ promotion of inappropriate health messages
  

Please find below a detailed explanation of each issue as well as counterarguments:

1. Wasted valuable class time: Channel One requires that their program be aired during homeroom and non instructional periods; therefore no classroom instruction time is wasted. By airing Channel One during instructional periods, is this helping to educate students on current affairs? Studies have shown that in order for students to learn about a particular topic, teachers’ facilitation of classroom discussion as well as relating the topic to regular classroom instruction is necessary. Teachers are not engaging their students in discussion as that time is usually used for administrative tasks. Therefore, Channel One is not adding any educational value to students’ curriculum.
   
2. Undermining of public system authority/Emphasis on materialistic values: What are the latest Nikes? What are the hot new celebrities wearing? So, it turns out that a majority of Channel One’s program is mostly a mix fluff pieces combined with advertisements. Students exposed to Channel One are more materialistic, place more emphasis on material object, are more likely to remember several ads featured on the program, have improvements in their product evaluations and a greater desire to buy products featured on the program. Channel One is mostly found in schools that are located in poorer communities. The public school systems are turning over its students to advertisers on a daily basis. Essentially, Channel One is sending the message to students that possession of material objects defines success. Is this the message we want to send to students who are underprivileged?
   
3. Wasted tax payer dollars/ inappropriate health messages: Channel One’s cost to taxpayers in lost class time is a whooping $1.8 billion per year. It is one thing for this amount of money to be spent on a program that is actually increasing students’ knowledge and prompting an in-depth discussion about issues presented; however, it is another for such a significant amount of money to be spent on promotion after promotion of unhealthy snacks such as soda, junk food, candy, etc. Obesity, particularly, childhood obesity, is a major concern in America. Policymakers have taken action in order to prevent schools from providing healthy snacks in on-campus machines. Some people claim that the airing of Channel One’s advertisements should not affect students’ because they would encounter these message in their everyday lives. Yes … it is correct that people are bombarded with an overwhelming amount of ads on a daily basis. However, shouldn’t the classroom be a place dedicated solely to academic instruction and not product promotion?
   

~ Hauwa Otori

Please look in the comments section for more information.

Argument 2: Channel One content and a dichotomy between interests

According to a study published in Pediatrics (Weintraub-Austin, et al., 2006), teenagers are more likely to remember the content of advertisements displayed on Channel One News than that of the programming. This news is especially unsettling when one realizes that advertisements comprise less than 20% of the 12-minute program. As a consequence of studies like this one and many others, parents, teachers and various special interest groups are wary of Channel One's implementation of an advertising-based model. Furthermore, many of these groups have called for such companies as Procter & Gamble to pull their ads out of Channel One's lineup, and some states such as New York have even gone as far as banning the use of Channel One in NYS public schools altogether. This type of conflict exemplifies the dichotomy between advertisers and the private rights of individuals. Where should the line be drawn when it comes to when and where an advertiser can communicate a sponsored message? In the case of educational institutions, sponsorships can be found on athletic clothing, scoreboards, school newspapers, and even special projects such as the Pizza Hut Book-It! club. Therefore, many advertisers would argue that advertising-based Channel One is no worse a medium for ads than any other that are in the school system. However, many argue that the Channel One advertising approach is a blatant attempt to prime children for additional consumptive practices later on in life. Additionally, many claim that the existing ads are hedonistic in scope and sensationalistic in nature (Johnston, 2001).

However, it is clear that an advertising-based economy is a pervasive force in America and it will not simply be undone by the protestations of angry consumers. Therefore, it is imperative that advertising companies find less-invasive ways to convey their messages. If they do not, their businesses may take a hit because of the controversy and ensuing pull-out by advertisers. Additionally, if private individuals want to see change in the way advertisers can access such private institutions as the school, then individuals must work to educate the teachers and the institutions themselves.

~ Patrick Castrenze


Please look in the comments section for more information

Argument 1: "funny" business behind advertising

What does it mean and how does a business effect an educational program when they are prominently an advertising business? Just to give some interesting facts and background on the business behind Channel One.

• KKR is best known for its leveraged buyout of RJR-Nabisco. R.J. Reynolds (the RJR portion of the company) is the parent of Camel Cigarettes, whose skillful advertising made its "Joe Camel" mascot universally known and widely popular among school-age children.
  
• 
  
• Channel One is an advertising vehicle owned by Primedia (formerly K-III Communications), a property of Kohlberg, Kravis & Roberts (KKR), which is well known for corporate takeovers. Channel One broadcasts into 40 percent of U.S. middle and high schools.
  
• 
  
• Prior to acquiring Channel One, neither Primedia nor KKR were in the daily news-gathering business. Yet Channel One promotes itself as the primary news delivery system for school-age Americans.
  

http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=888

From the structure of and make-up of the business behind Channel One, a clear distinction of conflict can be seen. Obviously a business will want to promote their products to increase revenue. It seems that Primedia is using Channel One as just another marketing and advertising tool to promote their products through advertisements on Channel One. It would not make sense for Channel One to promote other products that they do not own or represent, so their advertisement segments definitely take advantage of THEIR products and only theirs.

This brings us back to the idea of Channel One advertising being a very biased marketing tool that is creating a monopoly specifically when it comes to the rights to advertising. Similar issues to this arises when companies such as Coca-Cola sign contracts with schools to serve only products produced by Coca-Cola on school property. The question arises, when does this cross the line? Is it fair to only have Coca-Cola products? Is it fair to only have advertisements on Channel One by products OWNED by Channel One? Does the fact that because it is the advertising portion justify the fact that it is biased....as long as it is not the news portion?

An even more general question comes into play. Is it OKAY for an advertising company to own an educational program like Channel One? Or are there too many hidden agendas that goes with this agreement? I guess it is up to the citizens of America to decide, but I believe it is just not right.

~ Grace Oh



Look for more information in the comments section of this post.

Introduction/ Thesis Concerning Channel One

Our group has come a long way from starting with the general topic of cultural implications of new media to our focus of the advertising behind Channel One, a supposedly "educational" program, being implemented in schools in the U.S.

To keep our blog somewhat organized, we split this issue into FOUR major points

1. Business behind channel one advertising - (Grace Oh)
   
2. The content of channel one advertising - (Patrick Castrenze)
   
3. Effects of the advertisements on the students - (Hauwa Otori)
   
4. Mention the people who want channel one out of schools and why they want it out. - (Chin- Shan Lee)
   

These points will cover the issues surrounding advertising within Channel One programs as well as support our point of view that the commercial nature of Channel One is not conducive (inappropriate) for the classroom environment.

NEW SOURCES

Channel One News (2008). Channel One Help. Retrieved May 8, 2008 from channelonehelp.com

De Vaney, A. (1998). Can and need educational technology become a postmodern enterprise?  Theory Into Practice, 37(1) pp.1-9

Johnston, C. (2001). Commercialism in classrooms. Pediatrics, 107(4), pp. 1-5

Project for Excellence in Journalism. (2007). State of the News Media 2007. Retrieved May 10, 2008 from the State of the News Media 2007: An Annual Report on American Journalism website: Stateofthenewsmedia.org/2007/narrative_online_economics.asp? cat=3&media=4

Ruskin, G. (1999). Coalition Wants Companies to Stop Advertising on Channel One. Letter presented to Procter & Gamble by Commercial Alert.

Saba, J. (2008, March). NAA Reveals Biggest Ad Revenue Plunge in More Than 50 Years. Retrieved May 10, 2008 from Editor and Publisher: America's oldest journal covering the newspaper industry website: editorandpublisher.com

Weintraub-Austin, E., Chen, Y.C., Pinkleton, B., and Jessie Quintero Johnson. (2006). Benefits and costs in a middle school setting and the role of media-literacy training. Pediatrics, 117(3), pp. 1-10

Useful Book Resources on the Topic of Channel One

The following books are helpful to look at to get a better idea of what impact Channel One has on society, especially in schools and children.  Many of these books can also be found on Google books previews or Amazon.  I've included the descriptions that can be found on the book details.

 
By Ann De Vaney.  Published 1994.  
Watching Channel One: The Convergence of Students, Technology, and Private Business
Description: The book covers case studies, research studies, as well as personal stories from parents, teachers, and students.  The book comes from an approach analyzing commercial interests (advertising), social, political, and ethical implications of Channel One.


By Randall Curren.   Published 2006.
Philosophy of Education
Description: An Anthology brings together the essential historical and contemporary readings in the philosophy of education. Addresses topical issues such as teacher professionalism and accountability, the commercialization of schooling, multicultural education, and parental choice.


By Brian Goldfarb.  Published 2002.
Visual Pedagogy: Media Cultures in and Beyond the Classroom
Description: Combining media studies, pedagogical theory, and art history, and including an appendix of visual media resources and ideas about the most productive ways to utilize visual technologies for educational purposes, Visual Pedagogy will be useful to educators, administrators, and activists.


By Juliet B. Schor.  Published 2004.
Born to Buy
Description: Sophisticated advertising strategies convince kids that products are necessary to their social survival. Ads affect not just what they want to buy, but who they think they are and how they feel about themselves. Based on long-term analysis, Schor reverses the conventional notion of causality: it's not just that problem kids become overly involved in the values of consumerism; it's that kids who are overly involved in the values of consumerism become problem kids. In this revelatory and crucial book, Schor also provides guidelines for parents and teachers.


By Deron Boyles.  Published 1998.
American Education and Corporations: The Free Market Goes to School  
Description: This work argues that private businesses use public schools as worker training sites, resulting in a devalued teaching force, students as uncritical consumers, and schools as economic markets. Boyles analyzes school-business partnerships, revealing false philanthropy and the ulterior motives behind fast-food reading campaigns and supermarket "sales for schools" promotions.



By Roy F. Fox.  Published 1996. 
Harvesting Minds: How TV Commercials Control Kids
Description: (Review) In this eye-opening work, Fox explores the impact of the commercials carried by Channel One--and, by extension, all media--on children, how children respond to these commercials, and what we can do about the situation.   Publishers Weekly

Additional Sources on Commericialism in Schools, Channel One, etc.

Channel One's Mixed Grades In Schools By Constance L. Hays
The New York Times
December 5, 1999, Sunday, Late Edition - Final
http://www.ibiblio.org/commercialfree/presscenter/art_12599.html

News for a Teen Market: The Lessons of Channel One.
Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, v13 n4 p339-56 Sum 1998
Abstract: Describes the types of stories that Channel One covers and the characteristics and configuration of its news sources. Focusing mostly on anchor personalities and politicians, Channel One news serves as a promotional vehicle for itself and youth culture, providing a friendly environment for controversial product advertisements. Such dramatic and personalized news reportage should probably not be defined as educational.

What is Commercialism in Schools?

http://www.ibiblio.org/commercialfree/commercialism.html

More Sources on Channel One and Commercialism

1. http://www.uiowa.edu/~cyberlaw/SchBoard/Other/chanone.html#The%20Concerns%20Regarding%20Channel
2. http://www.unesco.org/courier/2000_04/uk/apprend.htm
3. http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/16/64/12.pdf
4. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9802E1DF1E3BF931A15752C0A961958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2
5. http://youthdevelopment.suite101.com/article.cfm/advertising_in_schools
6. http://www.commercialalert.org/issues/education/channel-one
7. http://www.eagleforum.org/educate/2004/may04/channel1.html
8. http://www.eagleforum.org/topics/channel-one/channel-one.html
9. http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/C/htmlC/channelone/channelone.htm

Advertising on school grounds is not philanthropy - it's marketing.

In too many cases, advertisers are interested in nothing more than the opportunity to market to students in a new setting. Profit, not education, is their priority.

Commercial intrusion in schools doesn't offer a solution to schools' financial woes. While corporate offers may sound like they're worth a lot of money on the surface, schools who've begun to accept, and even seek out these offers, find that the earnings are insignificant. Although they have opened the doors to advertisers, many schools are left without the textbooks, instructional materials, and qualified teachers necessary to provide students with a top-notch education.

For example:

• New York City's board of education signed contracts with companies that will place ads on the district's school buses. The board hopes to raise $53 million over nine years, or $5.9 million a year. In contrast, the New York City school system's annual budget is $8 billion.
  
  
• Facing a $35 million budget shortfall over three years, the school board in Seattle, WA, proposed selling advertising to raise funds. But the $1 million per year they hoped to raise from the advertising was not enough to convince community members to support the plan to sell access to students to the highest bidder. After five months of community protest, the school board rescinded the advertising policy.
  
  
• Schools that are signing multi-year exclusive contracts with cola companies are receiving as little as $3 per student in exchange for a monopoly on selling and advertising their beverages on campus.

http://www.ibiblio.org/commercialfree/commercialism.html

Channel One: It's ALL About the Money...

Channel One claims to be "the leading provider of television news and educational programs to America's secondary schools." But a University of Massachusetts-Amherst study found that schools that can afford to say no to Channel One do say no. The study found that the program is disproportionately shown in schools located in low-income communities and communities of color. Channel One is found where the least money is available for education, where the least amount is spent on textbooks and other academic materials.

It is dubious whether such news provides educational or civic benefits to either students or educators.

-- Professor William Hoynes, Vassar College

Yet communities with schools that contract with Channel One still pay dearly for this "opportunity." Channel One takes up precious classroom time with advertisements: each minute the programs air, taxpayers are paying -- and students are losing. A recent study by the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee's Center for the Analysis of Commercialism in Education revealed that school time lost to Channel One costs taxpayers $1.8 billion dollars per year, $300 million to commercials alone.

http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=888

Main Issues With Channel One

Channel One has received major critcism from parents, educators, and policy makers. Listed below are the main issues with this program:

1. Channel One uses the compulsory attendance laws to force children to watch ads. Joel Babbit, then-president of Channel One, explained in 1994 why advertisers like Channel One: “The biggest selling point to advertisers [is] . . . we are forcing kids to watch two minutes of commercials.” 2. Channel One wastes precious school time. Channel One consumes the equivalent of one instructional week of school time each school year, including one full day watching ads.

3. Channel One helps advertisers bypass parents to promote products which parents may not approve of, such as exorbitantly expensive athletic sneakers and violent movies.

4. Channel One wastes tax dollars spent on schools. A 1998 study by Max Sawicky and Alex Molnar, titled “The Hidden Costs of Channel One,” concluded that Channel One’s cost to taxpayers in lost class time is $1.8 billion per year.

5. Channel One may harm children’s health. Channel One advertises Snickers, Twix, M&M’s, Pepsi and other junk food to children in classrooms. The Journal of the American Medical Association recently reported that “Obesity is epidemic in the United States.” Obesity is a major public health problem. Given skyrocketing levels of childhood obesity and diabetes, it is insanity for schools to encourage children to develop poor eating habits.

6. Channel One—not parents or school boards—decides its ads and program content. Channel One violates the principle of local control of education. Parents should be able to choose who may affect their children’s lives, not Channel One.

7. Channel One undermines parents’ efforts to teach positive values to their children. Channel One teaches a curriculum of materialism, that buying is good, and will solve your problems, and that consumption and self-gratification are the goals and ends of life.

8. Channel One corrupts the integrity of public education and diminishes the moral authority of schools and teachers. In effect, Channel One appropriates the authority of schools and teachers and transfers it to advertisers for these controversial products. Schools implicitly endorse the products that Channel One advertises.

A general picture of Channel One

Taking a snapshot look at the Channel One company from the words of multiple sources in recent news and research:

Google Finance & Hoover:

"This company hopes when students need news, they'll tune in to its TV channel first. Channel One operates the Channel One Network, a satellite channel that reaches about 7 million students in more than 300,000 classrooms with daily newscasts and educational videos. Launched in 1990, Channel One provides schools with the necessary broadcast equipment (TVs, monitors, satellite dishes) to view its programs free of charge. It also offers news and programming on its Web site. Most of the company's revenues come from advertising. Marketing and media company Alloy acquired Channel One from magazine publisher PRIMEDIA in 2007. "

http://finance.google.com/finance?cid=7634939

Media Post:

"In addition to interactivity and a crisper picture, digital distribution also benefits advertisers--making it easier to change the geographic coverage, creative content, and frequency of their ad campaigns. Channel One's 12-minute morning newscast, including two minutes of advertising, reaches about 6 million teenagers in 10,000 high schools across the country.

Last year, Channel One also struck a deal with NBC News for branded news content produced specially for Channel One, and tailored to the teenaged classroom audience. Channel One next plans to introduce student feedback and journalism platforms, giving students a chance to participate in news production.

If they haven't already, place-based and out-of-home video networks are hurrying to upgrade to digital distribution, in part because of the flexibility and control it offers advertisers. "

http://publications.mediapost.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=Articles.showArticleHomePage&art_aid=81880

IPTV Technology:


By upgrading to digital technology, the Channel One Network will be able to deliver a sharper viewing experience of its news programming and it will ensure content can be easily integrated into today’s learning environment.

...Channel One News programming has been featured on leading networks and news programs, including NBC's Nightly News and The Today Show, CNN, ABC News, and Nightline.

With this movement to digital infrastructure, Channel One Network schools received a digital receiver head-end that is more flexible and has increased storage capabilities. It also allows programming to be burned directly to DVDs.

The investment in new technology this school year adds to a number of steps taken to make sure Channel One Network continues to provide high-quality programming and content, including upgrades to ChannelOne.com’s 24/7 broadband video news channel, ‘Livewire’, and a relationship with NBC News that allows the network to reach more global viewers.
According to Chief Executive Officer of Channel One Network, Kent Haehl, “We will continue to invest in technologies that allow us to stay on pace with a changing media environment, and provide an engaging, viewing experience to the many who rely on Channel One as their only source of news.”

Paul Folkemer, senior vice president of education at Channel One Network added, “With the new digital format, we will be able to provide a more engaging current events program for our students. Video-based learning improves the ability to understand and recall information. The new digital Channel One format will enhance an already valuable resource for educators who are using our program to ensure that their students know what is happening in the world.”  "

http://iptv.tmcnet.com/topics/iptv-technology/articles/26746-channel-one-enhances-viewing-learning-with-digital-technology.htm

Channel One Revisited: Prospective Teachers and the Role of American Higher Education:
A. J. Angulo & Susan K. Green

"Channel One is a privately-owned technology and news broadcast company that reaches...almost one-third of the nation’s middle and high school students between the ages of 12 and 17 (Channel One, 2006). Due to its size and scope, Channel One represents one of the single most successful diffusions of technology in public school history. Schools that enroll in Channel One’s services receive technology (i.e., televisions, VCRs, satellite dishes) and a direct link to the company’s 12-minute daily news and advertising broadcast. These schools receive the equipment in exchange for a contractual agreement stipulating that the televised news and advertisements will be shown to at least 90% of the school’s classrooms every day of the academic year."

http://www.springerlink.com/content/w33723h0117u6522/fulltext.pdf

Whoa! Does Channel One have something good going on?

On Channel One's Network website, it is now featuring a correlation litmus test

"To ensure that our offerings meet the highest educational standards, Channel One Network has partnered with EdGate Correlation Services to identify how the issues and topics explored on Channel One News align with your school's requisite state and national course curriculum and teaching mandates."

This tool is pretty neat. You can do either a standards or a content search.  In the standards search, you first go to the state mandate that you want to comply with, then click on the grade you're targeting and then click on the educational subject you're interested in.  With the content search, you can just click on the grade you want to look up and then content of the educational subject you need to see.  

Based on the statistical findings, it seems like Channel One may offer quite a bit to students that achieve both the purpose of educating them on various subjects and also with making it easy 
to justify Channel One's role in helping schools achieve state mandates. 

One search I ran on a standards search:

• Standards: New York Standards
  
• Grade: 9
  
• Subject: Health and PE
  

These results showed up that met the standard 1:
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR 1.1.2. Students demonstrate the necessary knowledge and skills to promote healthy development into adulthood.  

These 7 archived news stories from Channel One claim to help facilitate that goal:

Archived News Stories ( 7 correlated items )
2007/09/06: Healthier Meals when Eating with Family
2007/09/26: Eating healthy at fast food restaurants
2007/10/15: Food preferences may be genetic
2007/11/27: School lunch sales don't decline when healthy choices available
2008/01/31: School Stress
2008/02/05: Teens and stress
2008/04/21: Calorie counts will be required at New York fast food restaurants


Maybe there is something to this Channel One? Perhaps it may not be completely at odds with the unified educational intentions behind the schools of individual states.  Perhaps it could even be a unification across state boundaries.  

What are your thoughts?

Consumer Teens & Teaching Tools

In my last review, I brought up resources that described how the education in the schools of the U.S. is either becoming more unified or divided because of Channel One.  
One way that Channel One may be unifying the school education is through how kids are 
educated as consumers.

As Darby Saxby in the Yale Journal of Ethics put it: “Today’s schools must develop thinkers, not mere consumers, or they’ll help to produce a society in which everything is for sale - and nothing is worth buying.” 
http://www.yale.edu/yje/ch1.html

On Channel One's website, they describe themselves what Channel One is:
What is Channel One?
Viewed by more than 6 million teens a day, Channel One News is a Peabody Award-winning newscast shown in more than 11,000 high schools and junior highs. It is the most highly rated teen show in the country, covering news and public affairs that matter most to young people in America.

Does this create a unified educated public amongst the adolescent age group?

If we recall Bachen's article on "Channel One and the Education of American Youths," she mentions that the program has potential to advance students' knowledge of current events and increase their interest in news, it is highly conditioned on the teachers to create supplementary activities to encourage those interests.  Channel One has responded...

Teaching Tools presented on Channel One's website:
These tools are resources for teachers to use to supplement their learning materials and to reinforce in their students what is seen on Channel One.  Whether its providing the daily news 
script or weekly quizzes, teachers have these pre-packaged convenient short lesson plans on 
hand to give to students.  But what sort of material does Channel One encourage students retain?

Try this quiz:
CHANNEL ONE NEWS WEEKLY QUIZ
WEEK OF 4/14/08

1. Where does the Dalai Lama live?                 A. Tibet B. India C. Pakistan D. New York
   
2. True or False The “stolen generation” took place from 1869 – 1969 and was a group of British convicts that were forced to live in Australia.
   
3. True or False Last year, scientists discovered a frog with no lungs that can breathe entirely through its skin?
   
4. Which animal is not considered native to Australia?            A. Koala B. Emu C. Dingo D. Echidna
   
5. According to Amnesty International, what country executed more people than any other country last year?                   A. China B. United States C. Soviet Union D. India
   
6. True or False The Kilauea Volcano is one of the most active volcanoes in the world and is located on the island of Fiji.
   
7. What is the name of the current Pope?             A. St. Peter B. Pius VII C. John Paul II D. Benedict XVI
   
8. True or False The Prime Minister of Australia recently issued an apology to the Aboriginal people for the government’s stolen generation policies.
   
9. Misty Trainer and Kerri Walsh won the gold medal at the 2004 Olympics for what sport?         A. Volleyball B. Basketball C. Soccer D. Gymnastics
   
10. True or False According to researchers at the University of Chicago, people actually grow happier as they grow older.

Answers: 1) B 2) F 3) T 4) C 5) A 6) F 7)D 8) T 9)A 10) T 11)

Is this what the teenagers need to remember? Sounds a bit like trivia to me. But do the teachers even have time to make it through these materials? Again, most times, Channel One is found in schools that are low in financial and physical resources.  These schools are likely also trying to make sure that their students pass state mandates on math, science, and English proficiency tests. What role does Channel One play in this? Does it make students more interested in learning? Are they more excited about school when there is Channel One?


These are only a few of the many questions to ask and to consider.

Politics and Education: What’s the politics behind Channel One? Is it fragmenting popular culture or unifying it?

Like any type of argument, I found that there are two sides to the story of politics and education. Specifically talking about the issue of Channel One, there is both strong opinions for and against this new media educational program. Though sometimes people seem to be overreacting about the “severely negative” effects of Channel One, there are some legitimate arguments that support these concerns. At the same time, there are clear benefits of having programs such as Channel One in classrooms. The question that it comes down to ultimately is whether the benefits out weigh the costs when it comes to children’s education. (Which is easier said than done)

In Service of What? the Politics of Service Learning
By: J Kahne, J Westheimer
Journal: Phi Delta Kappan, 1996

Often times in popular culture different aspects of society overlap in many areas. One such area that involves every aspect of society is politics. In this article, Kahne & Westheimer state that often times politics is deeply embedded within the education system and in how “we” as a country want to educate the youth. This makes sense because we’re basically educating our future leaders (including political) and therefore it is only natural that politicians would want to be heavily involved in this.

And Deliver Us from Segmentation

By: E Katz

Journal: Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 546, The Media and Politics (Jul., 1996), pp. 22-33

This article brings up in-depth questions on segmentation in the United States culture in general. It asks difficult questions like how much power should the government have over public broadcasting in television and who actually has the rights to contribute to such public types of media? Katz brings up a great point about how important it is to have public forums in which people can share opinions and debate, but that television is more one way, just feeding information, but receiving no feedback from the viewers.

Other resources I found interesting:

Power, Meaning and Identity: Critical Sociology of Education in the United States

By: Michael W. Apple

Source: British Journal of Sociology of Education, Vol. 17, No. 2, International Perspectives on the Sociology of Education (1996), pp. 125-144

Channel One: The Dilemma of Teaching and Selling

By: Jerome Johnston

Source: Phi Delta Kappan, Vol. 76, 1995

Young People, Politics and News Media: Beyond Political Socialisation

By: David Buckingham

Source: Oxford Review of Education, Vol. 25, No. 1/2, Political Education (Mar. - Jun., 1999), pp. 171-184

Television News and Advertising in Schools: The "Channel One" Controversy
By: Bradley S. Greenberg, Jeffrey E. Brand

Source: Journal of Communication. Vol. 43 Issue 1 Page 143 March 1993

Toward Critical Media Literacy: Core concepts, debates, organizations, and policy

Authors: Kellner, Douglas and Share, Jeff

Source: Discourse, Volume 26, Number 3, September 2005 , pp. 369-386(18)

Popular Culture and Education: Implications for Our Youth's Education

I looked into Channel One and its impact on education and came across many articles similar to the ones Jeanne posted recently. For the most part, many people are not happy with Channel One's presence in schools . The main argument here is that most schools that have Channel One tend to be in poorer communities whereas schools in more wealthier communities have opted not to participate in the Channel One Program. After reading several articles with this main idea, I decided to take a look at the official Channel One website, www.channelone.com. The main feature on the home page was "Celebrity Prom Dresses" with a smaller section devoted to global warming and "Going Green". This visit to the website solidified people's concern about the program. Although the program claims to offer a balanced mix of hard news and popular culture features, a majority of these broadcasts are heavily focused on popular culture while hard news stories are minimal.

With this information, I thought about one of our questions for this project which is:
Does Channel One fragment or unify children in terms of education perspectives?

My immediate answer was OF COURSE! While lower income children waste class time with puff stories about the latest celebrity prom dresses, their more wealthier counterparts are spending valuable class time actually learning material which will help them advance academically. So yes ... Channel One is fragmenting our children. Sort of like the saying " the rich is getting richer while the poor is getting poorer" EXCEPT in this situation, the richer is getting smarter while the poorer is getting dumber."

So, my mind was made up. Channel One is definitely causing fragmentation among our youth. However, I decided to do a little more investigation and looked more broadly at Popular Culture and Education. Turns out that there are some people out there that advocate incorporating popular culture in education (see below articles).

With these new sources, I am not so sure if Channel One is causing fragmentation. I have formed new questions that need further investigation. For instance, could it be that incorporating popular culture into education will encourage children to learn about the world around them and apply what they learn in the classroom to the real world?

Steven Johnson in his book "Everything Bad is Good for You: How Today's Popular Culture Is Actually Making Us Smarter" argues that "the pop culture we soak in every day has been growing more and more sophisticated and, far from rotting our brains, is actually posing new cognitive challenges that are making our minds measurably sharper." So, could it be that children exposed to Channel One are in fact becoming smarter? Is there really a significant divide between poorer children exposed to Channel One and wealthier children who are not exposed to this program?

ARTICLES

Everything Bad Is Good for You: How Today's Popular Culture Is Actually Making Us Smarter by Steven Johnson

The $10 billion video gaming industry is now the second-largest segment of the entertainment industry in the United States, outstripping film and far surpassing books. Reality television shows featuring silicone-stuffed CEO wannabes and bug-eating adrenaline junkies dominate the ratings. But prominent social and cultural critic Steven Johnson argues that our popular culture has never been smarter.

Drawing from fields as diverse as neuroscience, economics, and literary theory, Johnson argues that the junk culture we're so eager to dismiss is in fact making us more intelligent. A video game will never be a book, Johnson acknowledges, nor should it aspire to be — and, in fact, video games, from Tetris to The Sims to Grand Theft Auto, have been shown to raise IQ scores and develop cognitive abilities that can't be learned from books.

Likewise, successful television, when examined closely and taken seriously, reveals surprising narrative sophistication and intellectual demands.Forget everything you've read about the age of dumbed-down, instant-gratification culture. In this provocative, intelligent, and convincing endorsement of today's mass entertainment, national bestselling author Steven Johnson argues that the pop culture we soak in every day has been growing more and more sophisticated and, far from rotting our brains, is actually posing new cognitive challenges that are making our minds measurably sharper. You will never regard the glow of the video game or television screen the same way again.

Startling, provocative, and endlessly engaging, Everything Bad Is Good for You is a hopeful and spirited account of contemporary culture. Elegantly and convincingly, Johnson demonstrates that our culture is not declining but changing — in exciting and stimulating ways we'd do well to underst

AMERICAN POPULAR CULTURE: SHOULD WE INTEGRATE IT INTO AMERICAN EDUCATION?

Fain, Thomas A Jr

Educating the youth of America has always been a significant challenge, and the present is no different. We will be more effective as educators if we integrate the study of the popular culture with traditional education. Doing so will result in making our youth's education more meaningful, more relevant to the world in which they live, and will allow our youth to truly understand more of what they learn. This article explains why the study of popular television programs, movies, music, and literature will greatly enhance the learning experiences of our students.

Educating the American youth is and always has been a significant challenge. Obviously, it would be wise of us as professional educators to use as many techniques as possible in order to be successful in our mission. It is tempting to become so concerned with the standardized tests that are so much in vogue at present that we don't strive enough to make education truly meaningful to our youth. We need to do more than just teach facts and mathematical formulas; we need to provide an education to which our students can relate. If we do this, our students will not only learn more, but they will retain more, and they will be better able to apply what they learn after they graduate from high school or college.

By integrating study of the American popular culture into the education of our youth, we can better provide a means for them to take what they learn out into the world as adults. Our students obviously understand the popular culture in which they live; by merging the study of this culture with traditional education, they will be better able to grasp concepts, make sense of what they learn, and acquire perspective of the world in which they live.

Furthermore, our students will have a better attitude in regards to their education if we can emphasize relevance to the world in which they are familiar. Also, integrating traditional education with the things in society that they see as important will better motivate them to learn... (see http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3673/is_200407/ai_n9421958)

Does Channel One fragment or support the school education and system? Is it a supplement?

New resources!

CorpWatch is an organization whose mission statement asserts that it “investigates and exposes corporate violations of human rights, environmental crimes, fraud and corruption around the world. We work to foster global justice, independent media activism and democratic control over corporations.”
In its report on Channel One in Schools, they emphasize resistance to Channel One and view it as a very negative influence in the schools of the United States.

They present the following section on resistance in their article http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=888:

Resistance to Channel One

Communities across the country are fighting to get Channel One out of their schools -- no simple feat as the contract lasts three years and generally renews automatically if no one protests. Students and parents have asked for alternative homerooms, spoken out at school board meetings, written newsletters, and even staged walk-outs during the program to protest its compulsory nature.

Communities protesting Channel One are in good company. Since the outset of the program, almost every national educational group has taken a strong stand against Channel One and other commercial broadcasts in the classroom. These include:
o American Association of School Administrators
o American Federation of Teachers
o National Association of State Boards of Education
o National Council for the Social Studies
o National Council of Teachers of English
o National Education Association (NEA)
o National Parent Teacher Association (PTA)
o National School Boards Association
o National Association of Secondary School Principals
o National Association of Elementary School Principals

From what we see here, it is evident that there is not a unified backing of Channel One in the classrooms of the U.S. Why is that?

The following articles also help to enlighten us:

‘Channel One’ Plan To Improve Education: Is It Short-Changing Our Youngsters?
Reprinted from THE SCIENTIST@ 3(7): 10,3 April 1989.
http://www.garfield.library.upenn.edu/essays/v14p338y1991.pdf

Channel One and the Education of American Youths
By: Christine M. Bachen
Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 557, Children and Television (May, 1998), pp. 132-147
http://www.jstor.org/sici?sici=0002-7162(199805)557%3C132%3ACOATEO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-G&cookieSet=1

Part of the abstract:
“This article analyzes research investigating the alleged benefits of Channel One-the technology, student learning of current events, increased student interest in the news-and the major cost-the advertising. It concludes that outside uses for the technology remain modest. While the program can enhance students' learning of current events and spark their interest in the news, its ability to do so is largely dependent on supplemental activities by teachers. Teachers are constrained in their use by organizational factors and restrictive terms of the Channel One contract.”

From this research report, teachers are shown to be restricted in their roles as educators. So what are the children learning?


Channel One.
By: Celano, Donna, Neuman, Susan B., Phi Delta Kappan, Feb95, Vol. 76, Issue 6
http://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/custom/portlets/recordDetails/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED366688&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=ED366688

Part of the abstract:
“In a recent study, described below, we found that teachers rarely, if ever, use Channel One as a focus of instruction in their classrooms. Even though the newscast is truly innovative because of its daily presence in the schools, its value as an educational product is limited. The program is switched on every day with little thought of how the show might help meet students' educational goals.”

From this research report, Channel One is not actively incorporated nor applicable to the educational needs of the children that are viewing the commercial.


Channel One in the Public Schools: Widening the Gaps.
Michael Morgan

Part of the abstract:
“This paper examines what kinds of schools and what sorts of communities choose to receive Channel One, and where Channel One fits in the pool of educational resources. The study used the data archives of Market Data Retrieval, which involves 17,344 public schools and covers grades 7 through 12, revealing some of the following items: (1) Channel One is most often found in low income area schools, where it is often used instead of traditional educational materials when resources are scarcest; (2) schools that can afford to spend more on their students are much less likely to utilize Channel One; (3) Channel One is more often shown to the students who are least able to afford to buy all the products advertised, thus increasing a sense of alienation and frustration; and (4) increasing commercialization of the culture and the schools suggests a shutting out of other voices and interests of the educational system. The study suggests that the use of Channel One in low-income, socioeconomically deprived schools presents an illusion of providing more and better educational facilities which only contributes to widening the societal gap.”

This personal account can be found at this website: http://www.yale.edu/yje/ch1.html (Yale Journal of Ethics):
Whittling Away at Education: The Encroachment of Channel One
By: Darby Saxby
In the article, Darby states, “Today’s schools must develop thinkers, not mere consumers, or they’ll help to produce a society in which everything is for sale - and nothing is worth buying.”

Overall, I was hard-pressed to find anything positive about the influence of Channel One in the educational support that it could provide to schools across America.

We've been re-thinking our focus...ahhhhhhhhhhhh!

So we've been re-thinking things. After our T.A. took one look at our blog and said, "Way too vague," we've been trying to think of a better way to link all of our interests. 

Here's what we have:

Education

Place and space

Politics

Pop culture.

Well, in thinking about ways to combine them all, Channel One News came to mind. If you've never heard of them, don't worry, but you might be hearing about them from us in the near future.

To give you a better idea of who they are, I've attached a link. And please, feel free to leave comments.

Quiz: Credit 101

Before getting a credit card, learn the basics

Also, here's a screen shot I yanked from their website:

It's a bit small, but the headline says: Are you ready to go plastic?

Literature Review on Popular Culture and New Media

Compiled by Hauwa Otori

Popular culture is defined as what is socially acceptable among the masses. With old media, television programs were programmed for a particular time. If your favorite primetime show came and went, your only option was to fake your way through the water cooler conversation the next day and hope that no one caught on to you. According to Chris Andersen, new media has created a fragmented culture through what he calls The Long Tail effect on popular culture. The theory basically says that with more and more content and available media platforms, our culture and economy is continuously moving away from a focus on a relatively small number of mainstream products and markets at the top of the demand curve and moving towards a huge number of niches in the tail. On the other hand; however, it can be argued that new media also allows a shared culture through other mechanisms such as recommendations, tagging, most viewed, most commented, etc. Below is a list of related sources that will help gain a better idea of whether new media leads to a shared or fragmented popular culture.



On-going Scholarly Sources

• The Extinction of Mass Culture by Marc Gunther, Fortune Senior Writer
  http://money.cnn.com/2006/07/11/news/economy/pluggedin_gunther.fortune/index.htm

• The Long Tail by Chris Anderson, Wired Magazine, 2004

• Rethinking the fragmentation of the cyberpublic: from consensus to contestation; New Media & Society, Vol.9, No. 5, 827-847 (2007)
  http://nms.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/9/5/827

• Media, Communication, Culture: A Global Approach by James Lull, 2000

• New Media Cultures by P. David Marshall
  http://www.newmediacultures.co.uk/

• Jenkins, H. Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. New York:
  New York University Press, 2006.

• Benkler, Y. The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom. USA, 2006.
  

On-Going Blog Sources

• http://www.tedfreidman.com/ – TedLog – Culture, Politics, and Technology

• http://www.longtail.com/ – blog based off of the article entitled The Long Tail by Chris Anderson – both basically talk about the relationship between the increasing number of media outlets and decreasing amount of choices

• Logic + Emotion: Influence Ripples + Social Fragmentation
  http://darmano.typepad.com/logic_emotion/2007/09/influence-rippl.html

• http://www.prsquared.com/2005/10/cultural_fragmentation_the_lon.html
  

Literature Review on Politics in New Media

Political issues are constantly being discussed, announced, and made fun of in our American culture. Everyone knows about political scandals, trend issues such as "going green" and "global warming." And now, it seems like new media is taking over the field of politics. There is more and more evidence of political issues, elections, campaigning, etc. going on in these new media spaces. The following are resources that address and discuss these issues of politics and new media and whether what is being posted in these new media spaces is an accurate representation of culture or fragmented one.

(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/opinion/ssi/images/Toles/c_08272006_520.gif)

Scholarly Sources:

Hervé Glevarec and Michel Pinet. From liberalization to fragmentation: a sociology of French radio audiences since the 1990s and the consequences for cultural industries theory. Media, Culture & Society 2008 30: 215-238. http://mcs.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/30/2/215

Michael J. Barker. Democracy or polyarchy? US-funded media developments in Afghanistan and Iraq post 9/11. Media, Culture & Society 2008 30: 109-130 http://mcs.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/30/1/109

Floris Müller, Liesbet van Zoonen, and Laurens de Roode. We can't `Just do it' alone! An analysis of Nike's (potential) contributions to anti-racism in soccer. Media, Culture & Society 2008 30: 23-39 http://mcs.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/30/1/23

Nick Couldry and Tim Markham. Troubled closeness or satisfied distance? Researching media consumption and public orientation. Media, Culture & Society 2008 30: 5-21. http://mcs.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/30/1/5

Andrew Carvin, "Mitch Kapor: The Case for Wikifying Politics" (2006) http://www.andycarvin.com/archives/2006/08/m

Pew, "The Internet's Broader Role in Campaign 2008" (2008) http://pewresearch.org/pubs/689/the-internets-broader-role-in-campaign-2008

Jenkins: "Answering Questions from a Snowman: The YouTube Debate and Its Aftermath" (2007) http://www.henryjenkins.org/2007/08/answering_questions_from_a_sno.html

Davis, Richard. 1998. New media and American politics. Oxford University Press.

http://books.google.com/books?id=f-Ka0nSKaFoC&printsec=frontcover

Rachel K. Gibson and Stephen J. Ward. U.K. Political Parties and the Internet: "Politics as Usual" in the New Media? The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics 1998 3: 14-38.

Bennet, Lance W. & Entman, Robert M. (2001). Mediated Politics: Communication in the future of Democracy. Cambridge University Press.

Holmes, David. (1997). Virtual Politics: identity and community in cyberspace. Sage Publications Technology.

Kahn, Richard & Kellner, Douglas. (2004). New media nad internet activism: from the ‘Battle of Seattle’ to blogging. SAGE Publications. 6 (1): 87-95.

Literature Review on New Media in Education

Compiled by Jeanne Lee

The modern curriculum in the West has developed in such a way that does not only purposes to improve literacy and morality amongst students, but is also designed to develop students’ understanding of social roles and their place in society. On average in 2004, American children between the ages of 6 and 17 spent four hours a week devoted to homework and 32.5 hours per week in school. Altogether, time spent on academics has increased over 7.5 hours per week compared to 20 years ago (Swanbrow, 2004). As new media proliferates and becomes more accessible to schools and their students, it is both imperative and remarkable to note what implications this may have on what is taught in school, how things are taught in school, and what students learn, which all then work to shape the nature of a shared or fragmented culture.

Sources:
Mazzarella, R. S. (Ed.). (2007). 20 Questions about Youth & the Media. New York: Peter Lang.
Swanbrow, D. (2004, December 6). U.S. children and teens spend more time on academics. The University Records Online. Retrieved March 28, 2008, from http://www.ur.umich.edu/0405/Dec06_04/20.shtml

News and Magazine Sources

• Mendels, P. (1999, September 22). Study finds problems with web class. NY Times. Retrieved March 28, 2008, from http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/09/cyber/education/22education.html
• Wallis, C. & Steptoe, S. (2006, December 10). How to bring our schools out of the 20th century. Time Magazine. Retrieved March 28, 2008, from http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1568480-1,00.html
• http://www.cnn.com/studentnews/
  

Academic Sources
At Columbia University:

• Johnson, M. (2006, February 24). CCNMTL brings new media education to new frontiers. Columbia News. Retrieved March 28, 2008, from http://www.columbia.edu/cu/news/06/02/ccnmtl.html
• New media in education progress report 2006. Retrieved March 28, 2008, from http://ccnmtl.columbia.edu/nme2006/panel_1_a_partnership_in_educational_innovation.html
• The panels at the third New Media in Education Conference: http://forum.wgbh.org/wgbh/forum.php?lecture_id=3034

International iCS Conference on New Media in Higher Education and Learning with the Annenberg School for Communication & University of Teesside:

• http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~ics/HigherEd.html
  Includes resources such as the position papers and abstracts of the speakers and further information and related web sites

First Monday: Peer-reviewed journal on the internet

• Achleitner, H. K., Vowell, F., Wyatt, R. B. (1997). Global conversations: New horizons for information professionals and students., from http://firstmonday.dk/issues/issue3_1/achleit/index.html
• DeLong, S. E. (1997). The shroud of lecturing., http://firstmonday.dk/issues/issue2_5/delong/
• Noble, D.F. (1998). Digital diploma mills: The automation of higher education., from http://firstmonday.dk/issues/issue3_1/noble/index.html
• Murphy, K. L. & Collins, M. P. (1997). Communication conventions in instructional electronic chats., from http://firstmonday.dk/issues/issue2_11/murphy/index.html
  

UCLA:

• Kellner, D. New Media and New Literacies: Reconstructing Education for the New Millennium., from http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/courses/ed253a/kellner/newmedia.html
  

Other Books & Journal Articles:

• Austria, J. L. (2007). Developing evaluation criteria for podcasts. Libri, 57(4), p. 179.
• Kollar, I. (2008). What has become of the new culture of learning? A view on instructional approaches with a potential for changing culturally divided teaching and learning scripts. Zeitschrift fur Padagogik, 54(1), p. 49.
• Livingstone, S. M. & Bovill, M. (2000). Young People, New Media. London.
  http://www.mediaculture-online.de/fileadmin/bibliothek/livingstone_young_people/livingstone_young_people.pdf
• Livingstone, S. M. & Bovill, M. (2001). Children and Their Changing Media Environment: A European Comparative Study. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=qykl-5RGimUC&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&ots=BgVMdHobe7&sig=5mGnOpXC-NzV9oG7wT3c8GibUWk
  
  
  

Examples of New Media Education Systems

• Center for Media Literacy: http://www.medialit.org/about_cml.html
• New Media in Education Lab: http://www.newmine.org/
• The Ad Council & Kaiser Family Foundation: http://www.kff.org/entmedia/entmedia071907pkg.cfm
  
  

About

• Electronic learning: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-learning