Saturday, May 10, 2008

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 After five months of community protest, the school board rescinded the advertising policy.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

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Wow!!! I realize schools in need help with funding sources all the time, but I hadn't realized they fought so much for advertising...to only be lacking in the end! I sympathize with both parties: I feel bad the schools are in such a bind to begin with, as to market themselves out. At the same time, the students are left with the ultimate consequences of not being properly educated. I guess my question, then, is why are the most important institutions in this country so low paid/funded in the first place?????

Anonymous said...

I remember watching Channel One when I was in high school, but I suppose I didn't realize its actual purpose. It is quite sad that the educational circuit is being treated with such little regard, because if it wasn't, schools wouldn't need to struggle for funding at all. I suppose it isn't a surprise, what with all the priorities the government has decided are the most important recently.