Bus Radio taking over the airwaves

The marketing "brilliance" of Channel 1 is no longer reserved for classrooms, but now the company Bus Radio has taken the "captive audience" scheme to school buses. In exchange for providing buses with radio equipment (including GPS for emergencies), every hour of programmed music (primarily pop and r&b) contains eight minutes of advertising and two minutes of sponsored contests.

Bus Radio describes themselves saying,

“Every morning and every afternoon on their way to and from school, kids across the country will be listening to the dynamic programming of BusRadio providing advertiser’s with a unique and effective way to reach the highly sought after teen and tween market.”

According to their website, they “will take targeted student marketing to the next level.”

Comments from WFMU's Beware of the Blog said the following:

I've been to the website and I've heard the media clips. They are playing music that is cleaner than regular radio and they still have fewer commercials than regular radio. Who cares if the kids are seeing commercials? You can't turn on Saturday Morning cartoons without being bombarded. I think it's a better alternative and my kids love what they've heard so far. I just don't see what the big deal is.
Posted by: Sarah W. | December 14, 2006 at 04:18 PM

The big deal is that this amounts to compulsoary commercials that children cannot avoid (similar to channel one). In your home you control whether your children are or are not advertised to... that is a *CHOICE*. I've seen the promotional materials that channel one uses to attract advertisers and the pitch goes something like "Johnny doesnt like watching tv anymore and when he does he skips the commercials. He's on the internet and out w/ his friends so how can you guarantee he'll see your message? At school!" Perhaps the culture of "Urban Span"/"Ad Creep" has gotten to the point where people dont see this sort of thing as a problem but one would hope there are still at least a few lines that shouldnt be crossed when it comes to advertising and I would argue that mandatory viewing/listening of advertising at or on the way to school would fall into that category.
Posted by: doron | January 01, 2007 at 08:53 AM

While some don't really see it as a big deal, others are up in arms. Unlike the comment above, some citizens, like those at Obligation, Inc., are very concerned over radio content including song lyrics, band personas, "news" content, and so forth.

Yet others are concerned that kids have no commercial-free zones left. Bob Hill of the Louisville Courier-Journal says (with more than a little sarcasm),

It’s a grave national crisis. Our children can see and hear commercials aimed at them before school, after school and during school. Saturday mornings are a special treat for our little consumers with 30-minute commercials disguised as entertainment.

Weekday afternoons and evenings children again are massaged with television and computer advertising. Yet there it was—that yawning, school-bus electronic chasm when young people without access to proper ear gear could be denied eight minutes of commercials per hour. All they would be left with were themselves, possibly opportunities for wider friendship, shared experiences and frank discussion.

Disgusting.

In response to the rise of advertising to children, 40 organizations and 64 children’s advocates jointly endorsed letters to the 100 leading national advertisers and the top 50 advertising agencies, asking that they commit themselves not to advertise with either Bus Radio or Channel One. To read the letter in its entirety as well as read the list of signees, click here.

If you are interested in TAKING ACTION, Commercial Alert offers the opportunity for you to email top officials in a number of large corporations, requesting that they stop advertising with Bus Radio and Channel One. There are also a number of additional activism options available through CCFC.

What now?! Is Channel One encouraging youth to smoke?

It seems that since Channel One was first introduced into classrooms it has been embroiled in controversy. Some things never change. Since its introduction into schools in 1989 nearly every major national organization concerned with education has come out with strong dissention against the news organization, including the following groups:

• American Association of School Administrators
• American Federation of Teachers
• National Association of State Boards of Education
• National Council for the Social Studies
• National Council of Teachers of English
• National Education Association (NEA)
• National Parent Teacher Association (PTA)
• National School Boards Association
• National Association of Secondary School Principals
• National Association of Elementary School Principals

For those who may not know, the Channel One Network leases audio-visual equipment to schools in exchange for a guarenteed captive audience each school day. The Center for Commercial-Free Public Education provides a telling overview of many citizens qualms with Channel One. To give you an idea of Channel One's reach, the Center says,

Every school that shows Channel One signs a contract, essentially promising to deliver a "captive audience" - as Channel One promotional materials call students. Most schools must air Channel One on 90 percent of school days and in 80 percent of the classrooms.

Students and teachers cannot change the channel, turn off the program, or turn down the sound - an ideal environment from an advertiser's perspective. In exchange for this irresistible opportunity to market to a captive audience, Channel One can charge advertising rates of up to $195,000 per 30-second ad.

Channel One reaches 12,000 classrooms a day, which serve approximately 30% of American teenagers. Each broadcast is 12 minutes in length, and contains approximately 2 minutes of direct commercials. In addition, many lambast the network for airing fluffy material that serves to do little more than to advertise other products and materials in the guise of news.

And it's important to note that students watching Channel One on a regular basis are disproportionately poor and of color. The Center for Commercial-Free Public Education says:

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.

This raises additional questions concerning lack of school funding and how many districts are turning to corporate contracts as a result.

In addition, in September 2005, Gary Ruskin, the executive director of Commercial Alert, published a report entitled Smoking Class: How Schools and Channel One Promote Tobacco to Students in which he showed that 60% of movies advertised on Channel One portray smoking and that research has shown that students who see a significant amount of smoking in films are three times more like to start the habit than students who see less smoking on the big screen.

Mind you, Channel One's own website features a testimonial from the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids, stating:

"Channel One is an important and valued ally of the Campaign... Thank you for standing with kids in demanding healthy lives."

That can make it difficult to know what to believe. So, look around and read stuff for yourself. Then decide.

If you decide you would like to TAKE ACTION, Commercial Alert offers an online letter than can be sent to your local governor and state legislators requesting that Channel One be pulled from schools due to their promotion of smoking with youth.

"Cathy's Book" - opening the door to direct marketing to youth through novels

Speaking of books, last September (2006) a youth adult novel came out from Running Press called "Cathy's Book: If Found Call (650) 266-8233." The book is an interesting cross-genre piece in which readers are given phone numbers and websites that they can actually call and visit as they read the book itself. But it has also caused a huge stink, both before and after publication, because it is one of the first in its genre to feature product placement in print for youth.

Motoko Rich's article from the New York Times last June explained that Proctor & Gamble, the parent company of Cover Girl, signed a marketing partnership with Running Press such that Cover Girl cosmetics would be featured in the novel's plotline in exchange for promotion of the book on BeingGirl.com. Sweet deal, eh? Well, until you think about questions of whether this blurs the lines between pleasure reading and marketing material more than is appropriate...

Running Press defended the book saying,

"It's always disappointing when people feel the appropriate response is to suggest that a book be banned, boycotted, or not read."

and I think that's totally valid, but I also think my freedom of speech entitles me to say I don't think a child's interest in reading should be exploited to sell product. Is the sanctity of reading for the sake of reading too much to take? Is this even still classified as reading or is it a great big ad? I don't know. And I have concerns of how this opens up the world of children's literature even more to marketing ploys. (I mean, we're already selling M&Ms to children learning math and Cheerios to babies learning to count.)

Annys Shin of the Washington Post does a nice job giving voice to both sides of the situation as well. It's a tough call, but it's not a product I can stand behind and I'm not very excited it's available for youth. What are we trying to do to young women?! Apparently they need a lot of stuff to be beautiful.

In response, the Association of Booksellers for Children (ABC) and CCFC organized an email campaign asking Running Press to remove advertising from the book. While the book is now available, you can still TAKE ACTION and write a letter of you want to share your thoughts with the publisher.

CCFC and FTC regulation of marketing to children

A little over a year ago I met Susan Linn at the Association of Children's Museum's annual conference where her speaking topic was "Consuming Kids: The Corporate Takeover of Childhood." (Her most recent book is very closely tied.) I had heard of her work before and was already interested in the topic, so it was great to meet her in person. (She's a really good vantriliquist!) Through that experience, I learned about the existence of the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood, an extremely passionate (and busy!) organization who's mission is as follows:

Campaign For A Commercial-Free Childhood is a national coalition of health care professionals, educators, advocacy groups and concerned parents who counter the harmful effects of marketing to children through action, advocacy, education, research, and collaboration. We support the rights of children to grow up – and the rights of parents to raise them – without being undermined by rampant consumerism.

Their website is a vital resource for keeping informed about current issues in marketing and advertising to children and the truly harmful effects it can have.

One of their key initiatives at the moment is support for a bill that would help reinstate the power of the FTC to regulate marketing to children. In 1980, the Congress limited the FTC's ability to regulate marketing to children and youth. Today it's easier to regulate material for adults than for children. Marketing to children (in and out of schools) has been linked to issues of childhood obesity, youth violence, precocious and irresponsible sexuality, excessive materialism, and family stress. If this bill were to pass it would help recognize the importance of putting children's health and welfare before corporate profit.

If you're interested in TAKING ACTION, you can send a letter online to your local Senator asking for their support on this bill.

If you would like additional background information, talking points, fact sheets and a history are available.

Getting started: a basic, basic overview

A little while back I read the book School Commercialism: From Democratic Ideal to Market Commodity (2005), in which author Alex Molnar outlines eight primary categories of school commercialism. Probably most everything that we look at will fall into one of these general categories, so here they are with examples when possible:

1. sponsorship of programs and activities – This is when corporations pay money or subsidize activities or events in schools in exchange for associating their name with the activity. Corporate sponsored scholarships are also in this category. (Examples include The Thomas B. Fordham Foundation sponsors several schools in Dayton. Also, Coca-Cola offers a number of $20,000 and $10,000 scholarships to graduating seniors.)
   
2. exclusive agreements – This is when schools and corporations make an agreement that gives a company exclusive rights to sell and promote their products within a school or district and the school gets a portion of the profits. (A basic, well-known example is when school district sign exclusive contracts to sell only Coca-Cola or Pepsi products.)
3. incentive programs – Corporations offer money, products, or services to schools in exchange for student, family, or faculty involvement in a designated activity. (Examples include Pizza Hut’s Book It program.)
4. appropriation of space – Corporations pay to advertise on school owned property – buildings, bulletin boards, buses, etc. (Example: Adcompany is a Dallas/Fort Worth company that puts ads on school buses.)
   
5. sponsored educational materials – These are educational materials, generally provided for free, that include “educational content” but are produced and provided by corporations. (Example: Dole's 5 a Day program offers free lesson plans and curriculum material for teachers.)
   
6. electronic marketing – Corporations provide electronic equipment or programming in exchange for the right to advertise to students. The best known example is Channel One.
7. privatization – This is when school programs, or entire schools, are managed by private, for-profit companies. (Example: Edison Schools run a number of individual schools and entire districts around the nation.)
   
8. fundraising – Corporations run programs that allow students, parents, or other members of the school community to sell products or services to raise money for the schools. (Example: SchoolFundraisers.com is a pretty typical fundraising company. I don't know about you, but I sold all sorts of wrapping paper, magazine subscriptions, and oranges as a kid...)
   

Being totally straight up, I don't think all school commercialism is bad (I'd take $20,000 if Coke offered it, wouldn't you?), but I do think that a lot of it is pushing very dangerous ethical boundaries in our schools. As we get going, we'll look at examples more closely.