CONTENTS

"The only genuinely educational use I can see for corporate propaganda in the classroom is to inoculate students against it, so that they will not swallow it uncritically without considering other sides of the question, but will make an earnest effort to find information from disinterested sources. Unfortunately, sometimes there are no truly disinterested sources." --David Lunney, Greenville, NC, on-line conversation

Since late 1993, Consumers Union has been gathering and studying examples of all sorts of in-school commercialism. Our collection can be sorted into the four categories already identified in this report: 1) Sponsored educational materials and media programs (SEMs); 2) Contests and incentive programs; 3) Channel One and other ad-bearing media; 4) In-school advertising.

With the latter two categories --ad-bearing media and outright advertisements-- the commercial content and marketing objectives are easily detected. Not so the promotional content and biases in SEMs and contests and incentive programs. Evaluating them entailed judging whether information was accurate and whether topics were covered completely and objectively, or whether they contained only information and viewpoints that favored the sponsors. We also judged them for commercialism: Was the material commercial-free or was the sponsor trying to build brand-name recognition or polish its corporate image? If the sponsor's name or product was given, was it used as part of the lessons, or just presented to identify the source of the program? Did any "implied lessons" come across because a company sponsored a program, thereby linking its name and products with a positive environmental, nutrition, or other image?

In evaluating these programs, we used guidelines prepared by Consumers International, formerly the International Organizations of Consumers Unions (IOCU), and the Society of Consumer Affairs Professionals in Business (SOCAP). And we drew heavily on ecology and nutrition experts from Consumers Union's testing department (a resource typical teachers don't have).

We didn't address the overall educational value of these sponsored materials and programs --their comprehensiveness (most are not intended to cover a subject completely), grade-level appropriateness, or whether they fit curriculum needs. Judging from the superficial approach of many of these materials, we'd guess many wouldn't make the grade.

We collected more than 200 examples of educational materials and programs sponsored by commercial enterprises, trade organizations, or nonprofit organizations with significant corporate backing. While this represents a large sampling of sponsored materials, it doesn't cover all --or even necessarily a majority-- of available programs. We believe this to be just "the tip of the iceberg."

The sheer magnitude of available programs made it impossible for us to include materials from organizations and interest groups with no obvious corporate backing --although such materials often "sell" ideas or viewpoints on a range of issues, and deserve evaluation and analysis.

The sponsored materials we did include ranged from simple "poster kits" (posters with print materials on the reverse side) to teaching packets of print materials to boxed multi-media kits complete with videotapes, software, and/or CD-ROMS and an array of print materials. Again, due to the huge numbers of materials available, we limited our evaluations to those materials that had a teaching guide, and therefore explicitly claimed to be curricular materials. Of the 111 programs that met this criterion, 77 were learning kits, packets, or posters, 29 were sponsored contests, and 5 were sponsored reading incentive programs.

Where we prepared actual ratings, they are provided in the charts at the end of this report.

While SEMs rarely contain advertisements, we judged more than half of the 77 kits and packets we studied commercial or highly commercial (see page 43 for the criteria used to establish the level of commercialism). Nearly 80 percent contained biased or incomplete information, promoting a viewpoint that favors consumption of the sponsor's product or service or a position that favors the company or its economic agenda. A few contained significant inaccuracies.

About half of the programs studied were produced for the sponsors by independent developers. Some were produced jointly with or have the endorsement of educational associations. We found that neither the involvement of an independent developer nor a co-sponsor is an indicator of objectivity and non-commercialism.

So blatantly commercial and biased was one sponsored educational packet --Decision: Earth from Procter & Gamble-- that a coalition of environmentalists summoned by the cloth-diaper industry asked attorneys general in 11 states to investigate the kit's truthfulness. Decision: Earth taught that clear-cut logging is good for the environment ("It mimics nature's way of getting rid of trees") and that disposable diapers are better for the environment than cloth ones. It did not mention that P & G, the country's largest manufacturer of disposable diapers, had financed the study that produced those favorable results. P & G stopped distributing the kit in early 1994.

Twenty-one of the SEMs we evaluated covered environmental and other science subjects (see SEMS charts). Most of these were sponsored by companies or associations with interests in environment-related issues.

Six of the environmental programs evaluated concentrate on solid waste issues and were sponsored by companies that produce disposable products, make packaging or packaging materials, use a great deal of packaging, or are providers of recycling services. Five of these programs bypass serious discussion of reducing consumption or reusing products, and present recycling as the main solution to solid-waste disposal. Waste Wise, for example, a resource guide for teachers from the Aseptic Packaging Council, teaches that drink boxes are easily recycled, but fails to mention that few communities have recycling programs to handle them. Steel --America's Most Recycled Material from the Steel Can Recycling Institute promotes the steel can as a superior way to package foods and other products and is essentially a running ad for the industry. The net result is a distorted picture of the problems, choices, and trade-offs inherent in the issues these materials cover.

DuPont's Less Is More --Learning About Source Reduction, however, stresses the more important of the Three "R's," reduce and repair, showing that when a company wants to, it can present a non-commercial, unbiased material.

Four sponsored programs present lopsided views of energy sources and use. Power from Coal from the American Coal Foundation touts coal as the fuel of choice while Natural Gas and the Environment and Natural Gas Vehicles: The Road to Clean Air from the National Energy Foundation and the American Gas Association extol natural gas. Neither kit reviews the problems associated with its fuel or discusses alternate energy sources. The American Coal Foundation dismisses the greenhouse effect, saying that "the earth could benefit rather than be harmed from increased carbon dioxide ..." The Exxon Education Foundation's Exxon Energy Cube program doesn't tout petroleum products but implies that fossil fuels in general pose few environmental problems and that alternative energy is unattainable and costly. Furthermore it suggests that worries about oil spills and strip mining are unfounded, since effective remedies exist for dealing with them.

On the other hand, Project Learning Tree from the American Forest Foundation is a non-commercial program on the subject of forests. Accepted as sound even by environmental groups such as the Sierra Club, it has only a slight bias in favor of managed forestry.

Nutrition was another popular subject: all but one of the 21 nutrition materials we collected were sponsored by food companies or food-industry associations (see charts, pages 50-52). Several programs focused on "NIMF" --Not In My Food-- problems. In Kids Get Going With Breakfast, Kellogg's presents fat content as the sole thing to worry about when choosing a breakfast food. Sugar and sodium content of cereals isn't even mentioned. Its label-reading lesson in Eat to the Beat neatly avoids the "Sucrose and other sugars" part of the label. (Both of these programs also show the Kellogg's logo and one of its cereals.) In The Incredible Journey From Hen to Home, the American Egg Board plays word games to minimize concern about cholesterol --Eggs contain 22 percent less cholesterol than previously thought." In Snacking Advantage, Nabisco identifies foods that have saturated fats --but neglects to mention that many cookies and baked products are high in fat, too.

Several programs got their commercial message across in pictures, not words: Delicious Decisions from the Dairy Council of Wisconsin doesn't say eat milk products––but a disproportionate number of the "delicious choices" shown on the poster are milk products. Kellogg's Build On Good Nutrition poster shows three Kellogg's cereals, not to mention its logo and ad slogan. Mars' 100% Smart Energy to Go doesn't say candy is a quick energy snack but shows "Team SNICKERS" logos everywhere.

Two programs from McDonald's avoided commercialism and bias for the most part by not showing its own food products, or even pushing the types of foods it sells. But perhaps the sponsor's pay-off for this is the association of its name with a program on health and nutrition, subtly creating a positive, healthful image for itself and its food products.

Nutrition isn't the only subject that food companies help teach. In the hands of creative curriculum developers, food can become part of hands-on science and math lessons, social studies explorations, and more. The trouble with most of the food-based cross-curriculum programs we examined was twofold: They seemed better at promoting their sponsor's product than teaching the curriculum skill; and the learning activity itself was often superficial, pointless, and probably a waste of class time.

The lofty objective stated for Campbell's Prego Thickness Experiment ("To help your students become aware of the many situations in which scientific thinking plays a part") quickly degenerates into the promotional objective of the sponsor --have kids prove its ad claim that Prego is thicker than Ragu. Domino's Pizza's Encounter Math: Count on Domino's promises to develop "mathematical problem-solving and critical thinking skills," but what it really does is continually remind students of its pizza and its logo. Count Your Chips from the National Potato Board and the Snack Food Association promises to "sharpen skills in computation" but focuses on potato chips and encourages consumption of chips. The objective for What's Buzzin' (National Honey Board) sounds like social studies: to help students "gain an appreciation for the need to cooperate" and "learn the roles of honeybees." Although it does teach that bees pollinate, the real lesson is all the reasons why kids should love honey.

Health and safety was another popular topic. Sponsored primarily by insurance companies and energy associations, these materials covered topics from fire safety to personal growth and achievement. As a group, these tended to be more objective and less commercial than food-related and environment materials. An exception was The Eyes Have It! from Sears Optical, which laudably promotes getting eye checkups but plasters its name prominently on the student materials. (Sears Optical also sponsored The Eyes Have It! contest, which was equally commercial.)

Many of these SEMs displayed bias in favor of the sponsors' product, services, or viewpoints. Choice, Chance, Control: That's Life from the Insurance Education Foundation blames risky drivers for high rates, oversimplifies issues, and explains risk in a way that justifies charging higher rates to people who are higher risks --a highly questionable practice when applied to health insurance (which is barely discussed at all). Advertising and the Economy from Procter & Gamble takes a non-critical view of advertising as "powering" the economy, creating jobs, prosperity, and economic growth. Disputable views about advertising are presented as facts, and P&G products are used as examples. Mobil Corporation's Critical Thinking About Critical Issues, Unit 1: Freedom of the Press confuses freedom of the press with free enterprise, suggesting that the First Amendment guarantees free-market capitalism. Choices & Decisions from VISA does address the "down" side of credit cards, but makes them appealing by showing kids using them to buy a CD player, bike, and stereo and by using examples that stress low monthly payments and monthly percentage rates. Though comprehensive in explaining the history and development of telecommunications, NYNEX's Kids In Touch kit emphasizes voice data over other means of communications, pats itself on the back for being a leader in the communications field, and where communications devices are displayed, always shows NYNEX-developed products first.

Several sponsored materials were difficult to classify. On a superficial level they may seem to have curriculum hooks in science, language arts, or social studies, but we didn't think they deserved to be dignified with such labels. The most accurate description (and a reflection of their educational value) is "products across the curriculum" --materials dreamed up to get their sponsor's brand name into the classroom.

Two writing programs from BIC Corp. (Quality Comes in Writing and Getting on the Right Wavelength) are primarily promotions for BIC, with brand mentions throughout. Looking Good from Armor All, a manufacturer of car-care products, overstates the need to clean cars and equates car care with a person's self image. Not only does it name Armor All products, but it also includes free samples for students. Photo Pals from Fuji Photo Film provides a free camera for each teacher and classroom, as well as coupons for film. In order to be part of the Photo Pals program, you have to continue to buy Fuji products.

Besides print, sponsors can get into the classroom though media such as video tapes, television broadcasts, and single-sponsor magazines. Like SEMs, these tend not to contain out-and-out ads, but are often laced with corporate names and brand names and often carry the sponsor's bias about its product or an issue that affects it.

P.E. TV. This physical education program, launched by Whittle Communications in June 1994, is a variation on Channel One's method of selling advertisers access to classrooms. Available to schools that have signed up for Channel One, the weekly 12-minute show is underwritten solely by Reebok, which spends about $2-million annually for the privilege. We question the efficacy of the show's premise (to teach physical education to kids by having them sit in front of a television set), but we have no question about Reebok's purpose in sponsoring the show. Its promotional presence is all too obvious. The Reebok name is linked not only with the phys. ed. messages, but with featured sports celebrities. The marketing emphasis was confirmed in an article in The Wall Street Journal, in which Reebok vice president David Ropes noted, "The company's hope is that through year-round exposure we're building a loyalty relationship with the students...Let's face it, we're in a catch-up position to Nike in this field."19

Mobius Program. Browning-Ferris Industries sponsors an in-service training program, The Mobius Curriculum: Understanding the Waste Cycle, which is designed to help teachers teach students the importance of The 3 "R's": Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle. It also offers instructions on how to coordinate a school or community recycling program.

We found that although the program promises to teach the "New Three R's of the solid waste disposal solution," it gives much greater emphasis to recycling as the best solution and gives no indication that recycling itself can have a negative impact on the environment. (BFI runs recycling programs and admits that one of its reasons for sponsoring the program is to create "a competitive advantage for BFI.")

Traditionally, magazines that carry advertising, whether classroom or trade publications, are developed and written with at least nominal independence from their advertisers. The better magazines keep what Henry Luce called a "Chinese wall" between their editorial operation and their ad-sales department.

But by definition, sponsored single-issue magazines never had a line between editorial and marketing to begin with. Our evaluations included five such magazines, all of which had as part of their agenda to promote their sponsors' viewpoint or image:

• Discover Card's Extra Credit didn't encourage credit card use but prominently displayed the Discover Card on its front cover and in full-page ads inside (positioned as a "tribute" to readers rather than as ads). Although no longer produced, it was widely distributed as an unsolicited supplement with four of Scholastic's classroom magazines and included contest components.
  
  
• In Wecology, McDonald's image-building-by-association with ecological concerns isn't enough: Two pages plug McDonald's as "the first in the restaurant business to remove fully halogenated (CFCs) from its polystyrene packaging in the U.S.," and brag of McDonald's other presumably Earth-friendly activities. The magazine was published in 1990 with World Wildlife Fund and the Ronald McDonald Charities Foundation and is still distributed free to schools.
  
  
• Canon sponsored a special photography issue of Scholastic's Art & Man magazine, which carried three pages of Canon ads, and linked Canon's name with photography in the minds of a "million students."
  
  
• Minute Maid's Summer Fun magazine (created as part of the sponsor's reading incentive program) names Minute Maid products in three recipes, and includes the Minute Maid logo on a removable bookmark. It was created and distributed by Scholastic Inc. and included a highly commercial contest component.
  
  
• According to its developer, Scholastic Inc., Careers 2000's goal is to "show 7th graders how relevant science and math are to their future lives by presenting career options which are exciting, attainable, and achievable." In the main, the career options and job skills highlighted in the most recent issue are those of importance to its charter sponsors --the Air Force, The Department of Energy, and the National Institutes of Health, which makes it a bit self-serving although not commercial.

Four of these magazines, it should be noted, were distributed by Scholastic, Inc., which uses its circulation of traditional classroom periodicals to reach students with sponsored materials. We think this gives the sponsored materials a legitimacy that disguises their commercial nature.

Science Screen Report. Produced by Allegro Productions, Science Screen Report is an "ongoing secondary level videotape program that focuses on the most recent developments in science, technology, and engineering." Science Screen Report is produced with the "active participation" of the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA). It is a series of seven video science lessons which are distributed free to schools through the underwriting of local corporations.

Schools receive one video per month from October through April. Sponsors include Alcan Aluminum, Dow Chemical, Exxon, International Paper, Monsanto, Pfizer, and Ohio Edison.

Allegro has been reluctant to send materials for review; to date none have been forwarded, which makes us wonder: Why won't they send them? Materials produced for curriculum use should be volunteered for review --in fact review should be welcomed. From their marketing materials it can be gleaned that Allegro charges local underwriters $1,600 a year to pay for the school's subscription. For this price sponsor's receive press release materials with photographs "for placement with local and in-house media." Each video "opens and closes with the sponsor's message, which provides excellent identification and visibility." Sounds commercial to us.

The NEED Project. The National Energy Education Development Project (The NEED Project) is a "national network of students, educators, and leaders in government and industry" underwritten by corporate sponsors, including Dow Chemical, Mobil Oil, Nissan, and Potomac Edison. The NEED Project was launched at a White House ceremony in 1980 and aims to provide "learning strategies that involve students, teachers, and the community in projects that promote critical thinking, leadership, and problem solving"; provide "students with the vehicle to enhance personal growth and their knowledge of science, particularly as it relates to energy"; facilitate "the exchange of energy education materials and programs to meet diverse local needs"; and prepare "a new generation of energy literate citizens able to meet the challenges of tomorrow." It does this by supplying schools with a catalog of educational materials (available for free to NEED members, for a fee to non-members) and offering schools NEED membership ($25/year). Membership also affords participation in its Youth Awards Program, an annual Energy Education poll, a subscription to the magazine Energy Exchange, as well as games, puzzles, and fact sheets.

The materials are primarily classroom activity guides for teachers. They seem carefully constructed not to offend their corporate sponsors. All energy sources (including solar and wind) are explored, but the negative effects of using these energy sources are barely touched on.

Two new in-class television programs were under development as this report was being prepared. We'll be keeping an eye out for how they hold up to SOCAP and IOCU guidelines.

The Curriculum Network. A Channel One follow-on expected sometime this year is The Curriculum Network from TCN. It is planned as an electronic library of curriculum supplements in core subjects, funded through a mixture of public funds and corporate "underwriting messages." TCN will begin a 15-month testing program in September of 1995, with an on-air target date of January 1997. The test schools will be located primarily in the midwest.

Media consultant Eric Jones and his California-based company, Screen Media Partners, are helping to launch the new network. Jones played a part in designing Channel One, but disagreed with Chris Whittle about the use of advertising. He says The Curriculum Network will follow guidelines on commercialism promulgated by the Public Broadcasting System and the NEA.

The Nightly Business Report. Nightly Business Report --planned for launch in 1995-- will be a "special high school edition" of the popular TV program aired by the Public Broadcasting Service. Each segment will have a team of teen-age anchors. The video series will be underwritten by corporate sponsors and distributed by West Glen Communications, Inc., which bills itself as "the nation's leading distributor of sponsored videos and films." The videos will be shipped by mail rather than transmitted electronically.

Corporations produce literally thousands and thousands of sponsored videotapes for classroom use on a wide range of subjects from nutrition and health to history and economics. Generally these videos are either loaned to schools or offered free or for a nominal fee. It was beyond the scope of this report to evaluate classroom videotapes, but a random previewing showed that many share the same problems that other sponsored educational programs do --commercialism, bias, and incompleteness.

Sponsored contests and incentive programs, in which students compete with each other for prizes, find their way into classrooms because they supposedly motivate students to learn --and they often offer prizes for the teacher or school as well. But what many do best is motivate students to buy.

For this report, we evaluated 34 examples of contests or incentive programs sponsored by one or more private organizations. Some are annual events, while others are one-time efforts.

A few seemed to put educating students ahead of selling to them, notably the prestigious Westinghouse Science Talent Search (designed to spur interest in science education and research among young people), the Scripps Howard National Spelling Bee, the Scholastic Art & Writing Awards/Alliance for Young Artists & Writers (originated by Scholastic Inc., and now sponsored by a group of corporations and nonprofit organizations), and the National Geography Bee, sponsored by National Geographic Society and Amtrak (which will be replaced by a new corporate sponsor in 1995).

But most were clearly designed to promote their sponsors' corporate images, products, or services. Like sponsored teaching materials, some sponsored contests promote their sponsors by including brand mentions or logos in contest titles and entry forms, and sometimes by offering their sponsor's product or service as prizes. Some present self-serving views of the product or service offered by its sponsor, such as the benefits of using sandwich bags (from ZIPLOC) or the benefits of using a bank (from The Greater New York Savings Bank). In our evaluation of contests, we used criteria similar to those we used to evaluate SEMs.

A number of contests --including samples from Delta Airlines, The Greater New York Savings Bank, and Sears Optical-- seemed to be targeted at kids as influencers of their parents. To heighten publicity value to the sponsors, some contests require that winners allow their names, photos, and entries to be used for publicity purposes (BIC, Discover Credit Corp., Duracell, Kudos Brand, Oxy 10).

Four of the contests we evaluated share the dubious honor of being the "most commercial":

• Oxy 10 $10,000 Scholarship Contest, a multimedia contest that requires entrants to send in a UPC or 3 x 5 card with Oxy written on it and to let the sponsor use their names and photos for promotional purposes.
  
  
• Definitely Dinosaurs Contest for first graders, sponsored by Playskool and publicized in Scholastic's magazines, whose stated objective was "to increase awareness of Playskool's products among readers of Scholastic's magazine for first graders."
  
  
• The Eyes Have It! poster contest sponsored by Sears Optical, which gave students a special discount offer for free eye exams, and also required students to go to a local Sears Optical store to submit their entries and to pick up any prizes they won.
  
  
• ZIPLOC's National Sandwich Day Contest, sponsored by Dow's ZIPLOC Sandwich Bags, is actually promoted in a ZIPLOC educational program, whose main purpose is to push the use of the product.
  
  

Getting kids to read and instilling a love for reading in the young is an important goal of education: also it's the focus of the incentive programs we looked at from Chrysler Corporation, Minute Maid, Pizza Hut, Toys 'R' Us, and McDonald's.

These sponsored incentive programs can be two-edged swords. On the one hand, kids who might not otherwise develop reading skills are encouraged to do so. On the other hand, kids are being used by the sponsors to influence family purchases. (We found all but Chrysler's program to be highly commercial.)

And incentive programs themselves lead kids to expect a reward for doing something that should be rewarding in itself.

From its pilot testing in 1989, Channel One has made a major effort to legitimize in-school advertising as a way of paying for educational programs and technology on a national scale. Since 1989, many groups, including Consumers Union, have vigorously opposed Channel One and the concept of selling in-school audiences en masse to advertisers, regardless of the perceived needs and benefits. Yet despite the opposition, Channel One continues to be broadcast to millions of students in thousands of schools.

What Is Channel One?
Channel One, is a daily, ad-bearing news program for students in grades 6 through 12. It is broadcast "free" to schools that promise to make it a mandatory part of the curriculum. The incentive to schools: free use of the satellite dish, VCRs, and classroom TV monitors.

Channel One is produced in the network's Los Angeles studios and delivered free to schools along with other Channel One Communications offerings, The Classroom Channel, P.E. TV, and The Educators' Channel. The automated daily feed is picked up by satellite dishes located at the schools between 3:30 and 5:30 a.m. EST and recorded by a master VCR. Programs can be previewed by teachers and/or administrators before being shown to students.

Each participating school signs a three-year contract in which it promises to show Channel One on 90 percent of all school days and in 80 percent of all classrooms. Schools may air the show whenever they wish during the day. Channel One's chief lure to schools is the equipment that comes with the program. In each school that signs up, the network installs a KU-band satellite dish and provides head-end and recording equipment, lines for re-transmission through the school, two central VCRs, and a 19-inch television set for each classroom. Channel One Communications owns the equipment, maintains it, insures it --and takes it back if the school drops its contract. Schools can use the equipment for more than Channel One programming. To the school, everything (programming, equipment, installation) is "free." The school just has to deliver the audience of youngsters to the waiting advertisers.

Channel One claims that it's viewed five days a week in 350,000 classrooms in some 12,000 schools across the country. Opponents, however, dispute those numbers.

According to a University of Massachusetts study, Channel One has made greatest penetration in schools in South Central, Mountain, or South Atlantic states and least penetration in schools in New England or the Pacific states.20 The study found that the program is disproportionately shown in schools located in high-poverty communities, where money for educational programs and materials is most lacking, and communities of color; schools in wealthy communities are least likely to subscribe.

What's on Channel One?
Two minutes out of each daily 12-minute program are devoted to paid commercials by such sponsors as Snickers, Rold Gold pretzels, CareFree bubble gum, Pepsi, and Reebok.

Periodically, Channel One presents live hour-long specials on major events. One, in December 1993, featured Attorney General Janet Reno answering student questions. These specials do not carry commercials, but may feature the logo of sponsoring companies with the message "programming paid for as a public service by ..."

Channel One's stated purpose is to "use news and current events information as a tool to educate and engage young adults in world happenings; make the daily news accessible, relevant and exciting to younger viewers; promote awareness of the relationship between national and world events and every teen's individual life; encourage young people to become productive and active adult citizens by proving to them that they are participants in history not just witnesses to it." But another purpose is to deliver to its advertisers a large and guaranteed audience for their ads. Channel One advertisers are willing to pay the $194,000 price tag to have 30 seconds of kids' attention in school, where they can't change the channel, leave the room, or turn off the TV.

Channel One --The Controversy
The main argument for Channel One revolves around schools' need for technology equipment they cannot afford, and the ability of advertising to pay for that equipment. Schools get what they need; advertisers get the targeted audience they want. The fact that kids see two minutes of advertising is not a problem because they're exposed to so much advertising each day anyway. "Ultimately it comes down to a very pragmatic decision. Channel One --the technology, the programming, the other resources for the teacher-- is only made available because of the advertising, the two minutes of advertising. It's as simple as that," says Jim Ritts, president of network affairs for Channel One Communications. And he has his supporters:

In an interview in The New York Times, Elias Chamorro Jr., a principal in California's East Side Union High School District (which has mostly Latino and Asian American students), said: "Bringing technology to the school that we normally could not afford allows me to have 104 television monitors that are totally networked and are used for our daily bulletins and with our VCR's." 21

In defense of the program, the network's repre-sentatives also focus much of their argument on the educational value of the non-advertising portion of the program. Company representatives point to a string of awards their programming has earned.

But many teachers, parents, school boards, education organizations, state education agencies, and consumer advocates oppose Channel One, recognizing that the price schools pay for Channel One's "free technology" is far higher than any benefits they could get. Despite schools' financial straits, there are issues much more serious than money that fuel their opposition to Channel One.

Using Channel One cedes control of the curriculum to outside parties.
The requirement that schools air Channel One most days to most students means that teachers don't decide whether it fits their curriculum --they must air it, regardless of whether or not it relates to what they're teaching.

An example: Marilyn Harris, teacher of freshman German at Glencliff High School, Nashville, Tennessee, reports she was surprised when the TV clicked on and started airing Channel One during class. When told she was expected to suspend teaching German for 12 minutes each day so her students could watch Channel One, she reported being "outraged."

"Perhaps the most dangerous ... of the implications," writes Joel Rudinow of the Center for Critical Thinking and Moral Critique at California's Sonoma State University, "is the transfer of substantial control over curriculum and content from individuals and institutions that are locally responsible --teachers, school boards, and parent groups-- to a remote corporate hierarchy." 22

Requiring students to view ads in school is unethical and runs counter to what schools are entrusted to do.
The American Association of School Administrators voiced early opposition to Channel One in 1989 "because it requires students in the classroom to view product commercials," explained associate executive director Gary Marx. "The classroom is a marketplace for ideas, not a marketplace for commercial products."

Former New York State Commissioner of Education Thomas Sobol, explaining why the State Board of Regents reaffirmed its ban on Channel One in 1993, keeping the program out of the state's public schools, asked, "What message would we send to students if we removed the ban [on Channel One]? That we value you as consumers more than we value you as students?"23

Showing ads in school compromises the integrity of education.
It's not the job of teachers to help sell candy bars, zit-cream, sugar water, and hamburgers in classrooms to students," said Nick Leon, a high school teacher from San Jose, California, and member of the California Education Association.

In 1993, the 9,000 delegates to the National Education Association's annual meeting agreed with him, passing a new business item "to investigate and file, when appropriate, legal challenges aimed at stopping growing commercialism of our classrooms which forces teachers to treat students as consumers rather than learners."

Other education associations followed suit. Among them, the National Council of Teachers of English, which in 1992 resolved, among other things, to "encourage teachers to resist commercial programming in school."

Students themselves have protested required viewing of Channel One. "We don't feel corrupted by watching commercials," said one student involved in a Fargo, North Dakota, sit-down, "But we think we should have the choice of watching or turning them off." The students won a partial victory. Fargo's North High School now shows Channel One before the start of the school day, and students who don't want to watch it don't have to.24

The ads often contradict the lessons schools are trying to teach.
Health courses stress the importance of choosing healthful foods over "junk foods." At the demand of adoption committees, publishers carefully avoid picturing sugar-laden products in textbooks. Yet Channel One brings into the classroom commercials that glamorize soft drinks, candy bars, and similar products that teachers are cautioning them not to buy.

In addition, commercials often promote consumption and materialism. "Over half the kids in Texas are too poor to buy their own school lunch," says activist Karen Miller of suburban Houston. "In light of this, it is egregious that students are forced to watch commercials at school and be reminded daily of the products they cannot afford to buy."25

The ads that students are required to watch on Channel One are more insidious than the commercials they see on TV at home. At home, kids can turn off the TV or raid the fridge during ads. They're likely to see competing ads for similar products, which helps temper the "sell." Commercial TV ads must appeal to a broader age range and can't hone in on the interests of their age group only. And no authority figure will be asking kids to watch, thereby giving the ads they see its implicit endorsement. Not so with Channel One.

"Market research demonstrates that such advertising [referring to that on Channel One] does have an impact, contrary to the claims of some, particularly when it is designed specifically for a target audience, shown repeatedly, and when competing products are not permitted the same access," pointed out the L.A. Chamber of Commerce in a 1993 letter in support of state legislation barring Channel One. "Furthermore, we are concerned that younger children especially will perceive the products as having the implicit endorsement of the schools, including products that are beyond the financial reach of the families of many of our local children." 26

Watching Channel One takes time out of the school day and costs the taxpayers money.
"Schools are already hard-pressed to find the time they need to deliver the planned curriculum," observes Gary Marx, associate executive director of the American Association of School Administrators. "Carving out an additional 12 to 15 minutes a day may not be reasonable in many schools."

"The time in question adds up," says Gloria Blackwell, President of the California State Parent Teachers Association. "The Channel One contract requires that the schools show the entire program, virtually every day of the school year. That twelve minutes a day adds up to a full six school days per year. If you consider only the advertising, it totals one school day per year. The cost to the taxpayer, for the advertising time alone, exceeds the total value of the equipment Whittle leases the school (when figured over the course of a three-year contract)."27

In 1989, California officials calculated that the cost of keeping public high schools open for one day a year added up to $29-million statewide, or $87-million over the course of a three-year contract.

Channel One, if allowed to flourish, will "legitimize" selling student audiences to advertisers as a means of financing public education.
Public schools rely on compulsory attendance laws to assemble students for the purpose of education. It is a perversion of that purpose to require students to view commercial messages. When Channel One was just starting in 1989, Bill Honig, then California Superintendent of Public Instruction, said: "We have no right — legally or morally — to sell access to our students even if schools receive some benefit in return." 28

In its 1993 letter in support of state legislation barring Channel One, the LA Chamber of Commerce said "... it is a poor precedent to begin to 'sell' the school day to pay for basic programs and equipment. Public education is public trust and should be supported by the public." 29

Channel One: The Bottom Line
Whether or not Channel One is a worthwhile educational program, the arguments against a program financed by advertising in the classroom are, in Consumers Union's view, compelling. We believe educators, not marketers, should control the school curriculum. We believe public education should be publicly financed, not financed through the sale of student audiences to advertisers.

Channel One has attracted a lot of controversy. But classroom magazines or newspapers that carry advertising have not met strong opposition.

However, there is reason to take a look at the print arena, too. Print ads are not necessarily innocuous. They certainly contribute to the growing commercialism of the school environment and possibly carry an implied endorsement of the schools.

Classroom Magazines
Two companies, Weekly Reader Corporation (owned by K-III Communications) and Scholastic Inc. (Senior Scholastic, Junior Scholastic, Choices, etc.), dominate the classroom magazine industry. Each company publishes a variety of magazines (weeklies, bi-weeklies, monthlies) targeted at different grades and subject areas.

Neither company accepts ads in publications aimed at elementary students, other than pitches for the publishers' own book clubs. Says Mary Harbaugh, Weekly Reader's Executive Editor of Elementary Publications, "Placing ads in magazines makes kids a captive audience...We never accept space advertising in elementary periodicals, except for occasional inserts for book clubs; teachers can opt to either use them or not use them. They are not bound into student editions. This is a company policy."

Although Weekly Reader says it accepts ads in its upper-grade publications, Career World, Writing!, and Current Health 2, we found no ads in the issues we reviewed (September 1994). Other upper-grade publications may include posters or other special materials that bear the logo of a corporate underwriter, without any advertising message. For instance, the March 11, 1994 issues of the teen magazines carried a supplement on alcohol made possible by a grant from Citibank. It appears that Weekly Reader (in consultation with the National Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence, Inc.) maintained editorial control of this supplement and that the sponsor merely put up the money.

Upper-grade magazines from Scholastic Inc. carry up to six pages of advertising. Scholastic's own promotional materials for advertisers claim it can "present you with the largest single print advertising opportunity there is to reach teens . . . in a virtually non-competitive, highly-receptive, captive environment --in school." 30 Advertisers pay up to $33,000 to put a four-color, full-page ad in the five magazines in Scholastic's Teen Network: Junior Scholastic, Choices, Science World, Scholastic Scope, and Update. Typical advertisers include Finesse Mousse, U.S. Navy, U.S. Army, Cliff Notes, Inc., Noxzema, Capezio ballet shoes, Milton Bradley games, Discover Card, and Warner Brothers. In addition, Scholastic's middle and high school magazines may contain corporate-sponsored inserts --infomercials, single-sponsor magazines, and corporate-sponsored contest announcements.

Video Programs: Another Model
In the course of our research, we uncovered two interesting experiments in sponsored programming.

Yaros Communications, Inc. in St. Louis offers two video programs with innovative links between corporate funding, local television stations, and classroom learning. One program, Weatherschool, focuses on the science behind weather forecasting. The other, StudentBody, concentrates on healthy eating and exercise. The programs are targeted at grades one through eight and are produced by Yaros Communications, Inc.

Local corporate sponsors help pay for computer software and teaching guides that are supplied to classrooms. The software for StudentBody includes games that teach good nutrition habits, while that for Weatherschool has students create their own weather broadcasts. Once each month, news and weather programs on cooperating television stations address topics that have been covered in class. Students are encouraged to view the segments --for example, a weather reporter's explanation of how new Doppler radar installations work, or a health report on the latest nutrition research.

Ronald Yaros, a former TV weatherman who is the president of Yaros Communications, stresses that no advertising appears in the classroom. However, students and parents who watch the televised segments will be exposed to the sponsors' commercials. Yaros says that the logo of a corporate underwriter appears in only two places --on the lesson plan supplied to the teacher and on the computer screen when the software boots up.

Direct advertising in the school has mushroomed in recent years, as marketers come up with ever more ingenious ways to tempt needy school districts to sell access to children. In preparing this section, we looked at advertising on school buses, in-school wallboards, book covers, scoreboards, and kiosks. We also looked at product sampling, fund-raising efforts, in-school licensing, and radio programs.

Advertising on School Buses
School-bus advertising is found in some school districts hungry for funds. And many more might permit it if it weren't for state restrictions.

In Colorado Springs, Colorado, for example, colorful cartoon ads for 7-Up are emblazoned on both sides of two of District 11's school buses. A huge 7-Up can is painted on the top of each bus, too, presumably to draw the attention of low-flying pilots, drivers on overpasses, and people looking out the windows of high-rise buildings. Two other buses contain art, logos, and addresses of local businesses. Burger King will have its logo on five school buses, with art provided by five local high schools. Starting in the fall of 1994, District 11 expected to have ads on a dozen school buses. The district is using the revenue from these ads to buy books, lab equipment, and other supplies.

Directors of California's Fremont Unified School District thought they might similarly bolster school finances by using their school buses for such advertising. However, they were blocked by the Highway Patrol's Motor Carrier Division, which warned that ad-bedecked vehicles would be hard to identify as school buses, and that ads might distract motorists and increase the risk of accidents. Steve Williams, director of pupil transportation for Mississippi Department of Education, says his department also considered ads on school buses, but ultimately rejected the idea because of fears about safety.

According to The New York Times, New York City is currently considering selling ad space on the sides of its school buses.31

In-School Radio Programs
By filling a school's hallways, lobby and lunchroom with rock music and commercials, some administrators bring in up to $20,000 a year in extra cash.

That is the pitch used by vendor Star Broadcasting of St. Paul, Minnesota, which began operation in the fall of 1993 and claims to be broadcasting Top 50 music and commercials into 400 schools across the country. Star's programming is strictly entertainment, not part of the required curriculum. But the music and commercials are hard to avoid --a point Star stresses when selling to national advertisers. Star offers both a rock format and an alternative "hot country" format, and points out that schools that want to boost their earnings can sell their own local advertising. A big school might take in an additional $15,000 this way, Star estimates. Like Whittle, Star equips schools with a satellite dish to receive its programming; Star values the equipment at $5,000 per school.

In 1994, National Public Radio news visited Apple Valley High School, a suburban school south of Minneapolis, to gauge reactions to Star's programming. It quoted a Star spokesman as saying, "Our whole cause and our drive is not about advertising, it's about helping schools." Two students interviewed on-air welcomed the music, and Apple Valley's principal was grateful to have found a new source of funds.32

Is there any harm to such advertising? Supporters of the venture say kids like the music and they're used to the ads. But we question the wisdom of distracting students with pop music and commercials when there are already so many demands for students' attention during the hours schools should be imparting basic knowledge.

Ads on Walls
To ambitious marketers, school wall surfaces look like opportunity. And wherever fund-poor educators are willing to try something new, marketing schemes are taking hold.

Advertising panels, or wallboards, in hallways and lunch rooms are commonplace sights for many students. Whittle Communications pioneered the trend when it began placing wallboards in schools during the 1980s. Each wallboard contained product advertising along with educational messages from celebrities. By 1989, 5,400 high schools carried Whittle's Connections wallboards and 9,000 elementary schools carried the comparable Big Picture wallboards. Whittle has since dropped its Connections service and is reevaluating the Big Picture as well. However, imitators have picked up on the idea.

Youthtalk Advertising Agency in Salt Lake City has pushed the wallboard idea a step further. Starting with two schools in 1992, it began placing acrylic-faced billboards in school restrooms and cafeterias. For the 1994-1995 school year, the company placed its wallboards in 42 high schools in 10 school districts in the Salt Lake City, Ogden, and Provo areas. It estimated that some 80,000 students have seen the ads while sitting in toilet stalls and standing at urinals. When they wash their hands they find ads around the restroom mirrors. A portion of the ad space is set aside for public service messages and notices of school-related events.

Edward Jackson, president and founder of Youthtalk, has even found a philosophical justification for restroom ads: They reduce damage from graffiti. Youthful artists scrawl on the acrylic rather than on the toilet stalls themselves. Jackson also claims educational benefits: his ads empower students. Students in graphic arts classes design some of the ads.

But the real bottom line is money. Jackson says schools that sign up for his service can realize from $2,000 to $10,000 in ad revenue each year.

While Youthtalk operates only in Utah at present, it hopes to carry its ideas to other states in the future.

Textbook Covers
More than 16 million students in almost 25,000 schools use their free book covers, claims Cover Concepts Marketing Services, Inc. Fifty different advertisers --including Nike, McDonald's and Hershey-- use the covers to pitch sneakers, food, and other products to elementary, junior high and high school students. According to Cover Concepts, most advertisers include "socially responsible" messages, such as "Stay in School" and appeals for "racial harmony." But we found plenty of big-brand candy, apparel, and food marketers, as well.

National Book Covers (Whitefish, MT) also provides schools with free ad-bearing book covers, but would not send us their materials to review.

Student Publications
Students themselves often publish ad-supported newspapers and yearbooks. These serve as training grounds for future journalists and marketing specialists, and ads serve to recover some of the costs involved in the endeavor. Students gain work-related experience selling ads to neighborhood shops and local outlets of national chain stores. They may also sell yearbook space to their parents, family members, and neighbors.

Advertisers use the space to promote their products and services or to build up a corporate image. Local soft drink bottlers are avid users of newspaper and yearbook space. Coca-Cola supports sports and the arts in many schools, so Coca-Cola bottlers' ads often salute a school's basketball team or theater group. Individual clothing stores in the Benneton chain also buy space in school yearbooks to congratulate the graduating classes of local high schools.

Scoreboards
Perhaps no school surfaces get more concentrated attention than sports scoreboards. A logo or ad on a scoreboard receives prime-time exposure throughout the sports season. Therefore, advertising revenue can be significant. And many schools avail themselves of the opportunity. Soft-drink bottlers and distributors are among the leading supporters of school sports activities.

During the 1992-1993 school year in Layton, Utah, for example, the local Coca-Cola bottler donated $45,000 for several scoreboards, including a four-sided electronic scoreboard suspended from the ceiling in the gymnasium at the new Northridge High School. The large scoreboard carries only the Coke logo.

In Colorado Springs, Co., on the other hand, the Pepsi logo is the exclusive sponsor adorning the eight-foot-square lighted scoreboard for District 11.

In fund-poor New York City, where basketball is the most popular sport and school equipment is frequently broken, Van Wagner Playground Programs signed agreements with school boards to install and maintain basketball backboards, rims, and nets in elementary, junior high and high school yards. Money was provided by FILA (makers of athletic clothing) and Foot Locker (makers of sneakers), both of which signed three-year contracts. As of September 1994, 625 schoolyard basketball courts had been rehabilitated. No advertising appears on the backboards — only a tag reading "Donated by..." Van Wagner anticipates expanding to Philadelphia, Boston, Dallas, Detroit, and Washington, D.C., in the future.

Vending Machines
Soft-drink bottlers vie for exclusive rights to place their vending machines in schools to build brand loyalty among school kids. Whether it's Coca-Cola or Pepsi, the colorful machines placed strategically in high-traffic areas outside the school cafeteria, in the lobby, or in a main hallway lock in loyalty from the young passers by.

Critics like Democratic Senator Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont want to get such vending machines out of the schools. His concern is not so much with commercialism as with the lack of nutritional value in the products most school vending machines offer to kids. He introduced a bill in the Senate in 1994. Not surprisingly, he met opposition from Coca-Cola, which makes millions from school vending machines. But the other vocal opposition block were school administrators, who have become dependent on the funds they get from the machines' sales. 33

Kiosks
In DeKalb County, Ga., the school board has agreed to install pay phones with electronic kiosks that display a continuous loop of five-second ads in each of its 26 junior and senior high schools. A Deputy Superintendent maintains that the ads don't represent a problem since they aren't in the classroom. 34

Product Give-aways and Coupons
The distribution of coupons for free, "trial-size," or "cents off" the 32-ounce size of a product has become a national institution. They're handed out in supermarkets, appear in local newspapers, and can be found in any elementary school classroom that's taking part in the Minute Maid Summer Reading Program. But coupons are not the only give-aways that companies are distributing in the nation's schools.

Product samples --toothpaste, snack foods, candy bars-- are also making their way into schools. Usually they come with some educational materials for the teacher and the students --a video on how to brush your teeth properly, or a unit on nutrition that describes how certain snack foods help you grow. As teachers become more desperate for new, more up-to-date and more interesting materials to supplement aging textbooks and other basics, they begin to look more favorably even at samples of products that arrive without accompanying educational materials.

Corporations are looking to jump into this niche with products they hope teachers will distribute to their classes. Several products from a single company can be put together in one bag. Or the products of several companies can go into the same bag. Product samples even come with advertising materials the teacher can send home with the kids.

Modern Talking Picture's Product Sampling unit has been placing companies' products in schools for eight years. Its advertising claims that the company can reach " ...more than 14,000 teachers and over two million students. And the cost of the program can be less than mailing a letter to each student." All of Modern's sampling programs include classroom activities and teaching guides, and are sent "only as a part of a total educational package." Roseanne Pollak, company vice president, claims that samples are sent only if they are requested, with enough time for teachers to look them over and to decide whether the materials are proper for their classroom.

Lifetime Learning Systems gave away more than one million samples of General Mills' snack food, Fruit Roll-Ups, to preschool children in the classroom. The package included a growth chart, a calendar, and some student activities. Materials told about the foods people eat and the fruits that they grow --both related to the sample fruit snack. A take-home booklet was included so the sponsor's advertising message could reach kids' parents at home, giving the sponsor two bangs for their buck. Lifetime's advertising claims that it can reach 600,000 preschool students.

Modern's TeenPak sampling program comes with teaching materials and promises companies to "get your product into the hands of the $81 billion teen market more ways than anyone...in a focused classroom setting." Their Prom Promise sampling program, developed for Nationwide Insurance Company, will give a package of as yet unspecified products to students who sign a pledge not to drink and drive on their prom night.

But Cover Concepts doesn't see the need to have educational materials as part of its projected Grab Bag sampling program. Steven Shulman, the company's president of operations, plans on including messages from sponsors urging kids to "Stay in school" and "Don't do drugs" in the grab bags he hopes to distribute early in 1995. Those samples will go straight into the hands of the 20 million students who now use Cover Concepts' book covers.

Other marketing groups, including Sampling Corp. of America and Scholastic, also put together product sample packs for students.

Fund-Raisers
Fund-raisers turn kids into salespeople. Kids are pressured to either sell something or collect labels or receipts forcing them to convince their parents, neighbors, relatives, and friends to buy certain products or frequent certain restaurants or retailers. Sometimes kids are even exhorted to go door to door selling a product or service. Companies that sponsor such fund-raisers not only gain an unpaid sales force, they can often sell products at a higher price than the market would ordinarily bear, since the enterprise is presented as charitable in nature.

Corporate Fund-Raisers.
Major corporations sponsor a wide range of fund-(or equipment-) raisers. Companies that have offered money or equipment to schools for buying their products or shopping at their stores include: Hershey, Jif peanut butter (Procter & Gamble), Orville Redenbacker, a number of grocery stores and chains, and magazine sellers.

These companies are very direct: They tell schools to get their students or their parents to buy from us, and we'll give your school or students something in return. The prizes run the gamut from playground equipment to computers. Companies solicit students, their families, and teachers to promote or buy their products for some kind of good --buy a product (peanut butter or canned soup), show proof of purchase, and win a new backstop or other benefit for your school. Or they encourage students to get their families to shop at certain stores, turn in receipts, win gifts for the school. Such programs have schools put unfair pressure on kids to influence family purchases that they have no control over. Kids also learn to choose products or stores for all the wrong reasons.

Labels for Goods.
Campbell's has been using school children for years to collect labels and UPC codes from their soup cans and other food products. Their advertising, directed at classroom teachers, tells them to urge their students to get the labels from their own and their neighbors' homes. Campbell's says that "In the past 20 years, these schools have redeemed billions of labels for more than $60-million in free equipment." Some of the items schools can "buy" are books for their libraries, slide and film projectors, and equipment for their playgrounds and gymnasiums.

Dialing for Schools.
Florida schools are involved with fund raising through its "Dialing for Florida Public Schools" program. Local residents ("students' families, friends and neighbors") and businesses sign up for a "long distance telephone service that will help raise potentially millions of new dollars annually for Florida's Public Schools and significant funds for Florida Association of School Administrators (FASA), too." Schools and FASA are promised "six percent of the net" by the sponsor, a group called the Affinity Fund. A school that signs up 500 subscribers can raise approximately $15,300 annually for itself and $1,700 for FASA. (Maryland and other states are looking into this).

Driving for Education.
Chevrolet/Geo dealers' "Driving for Education" program lures parents and other interested adults into Chevy's showrooms to test drive a new Geo or Chevrolet. For this drivers get a "Proof of Drive" certificate, which they can turn in at their child's school. The school turns in the accumulated certificates for Apple Computer products, audio/visual equipment, or encyclopedias. While the program directly targets administrators and teachers rather than students, there is implied pressure on all the kids in a participating school to get their parents into that showroom. Everyone in the school knows which parents have already taken a ride. Students are also involved indirectly as participants in the awards ceremony, which can take place in a "special school assembly, half-time of a sporting event, at [the local] dealership, or during lunch in the cafeteria," and which can include entertainment "to be provided by the school's chorus, band, theater group, cheerleaders, etc."

Fund-raising companies.
The old-fashioned bake sale or car wash pales beside today's modern fund-raising for hire industry. More than 100 fund-raising companies representing candy makers, magazine publishers, and others supply the schools with products to sell; the kids do the selling; and the school or school group gets a percentage of the sale.

In-School Licensing
The opportunity to earn revenue from the names and logos of their teams and programs also brings schools into the commercial advertising arena. Recently, school boards in Utah, Florida, Illinois, and Nebraska signed agreements with School Properties, Inc., a San Francisco promotions and licensing company, to market their school names. The license agreement permits School Properties to create products carrying member school logos and emblems. The company finds corporate sponsorships for them, does catalogue marketing, and even makes arrangements for school-backed credit cards.

Envious of the "millions of dollars" raised by college and professional sports groups, Utah School Boards Association associate executive director Darrell K. White wants to get "greater access to discretionary funding" from the arrangement. He looks forward to revenues of $250,000 to $500,000. Florida officials are even more optimistic, hoping to make $1-million dollars for their schools.

The promoters of this partnership expect that nearly two dozen other state school boards and school administrators associations will sign up before long. Others are less optimistic about this fund-raising concept. Some have adopted a wait-and-see attitude toward the amount of cash to expect. And others worry that the products sold will have little to do with the schools themselves. 35

Where Is This All Going?
Just cataloguing and describing these numerous marketing ventures that target school kids is exhausting. What concerns us, however, is not just the sheer numbers of marketers eager to leap into schools. We are also disturbed by the apparent willingness of educators and school administrators to subject the children entrusted to their care to such commercial influences and pressures, all in the name of acquiring equipment or money.

¹⁹ Pereira, Joseph. "'Liked the Lesson, and Loved the Shoes.'" The Wall Street Journal (August 25, 1994): B1

²⁰ Morgan, Michael. Channel One In the Public Schools: Widening the Gap. Department of Communications, University of Massachusetts-Amherst, October 13, 1995.

²¹ Bishop, Katherine. "Commercial TV Program for Schools Faces a Test." The New York Times (June 4, 1992): A16.

²² Rudinow, Joel. "Channel One Whittles Away at Education." Education Leadership (December 1989/January 1990): 70-73.

²³ Dao, James. "New York Regents Reaffirm Ban on TV Program in Classrooms." The New York Times (June 26, 1993): 16.

²⁴ Templeton, Robin. "Not for Sale: The Fight for Commercial-Free Education." The Boycott Quarterly (Summer 1994): 10.

²⁵ Press Release from UNPLUG (December 1993). Contact: Robin Templeton.

²⁶ Letter to Art Torres, California State Senate, from the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce in support of SB1047, which opposed Channel One (June 4, 1993).

²⁷ Blackwell, Gloria, President of the California PTA. "'Channel One' Case Is Appealed." California Department of Education News Release (March 26, 1993).

²⁸ Honig, Bill. "Honig Explains Why Channel One Is Banned from California Schools." California State Department of Education News Release (August 4, 1989).

²⁹ Same as #26.

³⁰ Promotional materials from Scholastic Inc.

³¹ Newman, Maria. "Cortines Offers Ideas to Save School Budget." The New York Times (February 23, 1995): B3.

³² Wilke, Michael. "Reading, Writing and Rock 'n' Roll." Inside Media (October 8, 1995): 18.

³³ "Senator, Promoting Student Nutrition, Battles Coca-Cola." The New York Times (April 26, 1994): A20.

³⁴ Walker, Reagan. "Tempting Offers in Trying Times." The School Administrator (August 1992): 24.

³⁵ "Schools Turning to Sponsors to Add to Coffers." Education Week (September 21, 1994): 1.