By Jamie York
Channel One allows corporate advertisers access to the lucrative youth market. While Channel One provides some revenue to the schools -- such as TV sets for classrooms as an incentive for financially strapped schools to participate -- the bottom line is that Channel One provides a captive youth audience for advertisers.
Channel One's daily programming consists of 10 minutes of "news," chatter, and fluff and two minutes of advertising, so the elapsed time between the actual beginning of the class period and the end of Channel One programming is about 12-15 minutes. If a class is scheduled for 50 minutes, the actual time available to complete the day's lesson plan is thereby reduced to about 35 -38 minutes. Every week, more than one hour of class time is wasted on Channel One.
Some students like Channel One and ask that it be turned on, but most see it as a routine break from classroom activities and do not pay much attention to it. They want it on simply because it kills time. Some teachers, however, quiz students on the channel's content to ensure that the students watch and pay attention. These quizzes then become part of the student's course grade.
Channel One is owned by Primedia. Like the rest of the corporate news media, Channel One does not provide the relevant historical background information needed to understand political events in context. Channel One provides news headlines and a couple of feature stories on subjects such as popular culture, entertainment, sports, or technology. The rest is advertising.
Among Primedia's claims to prospective advertisers is that Channel One News is delivered daily to more than 8 million teens in over 350,000 classrooms. "With youthful anchors, popular music and cool graphics, the show is produced in a format to which teens can relate." Primedia also says that Channel One News is the "highest rated teen television program," with a rating "over 20 times larger than MTV's average prime."
In the same way that a syringe is used to inject a drug into the body, Channel One is used to inject the corporate message into the minds of students. Its forced advertising is not only a waste of class time, but is a waste of taxpayer dollars. While Primedia says that Channel One News "educates" youth regarding popular culture, the larger picture is that it promotes fatty foods, consumer goods and violent movies. Rather than promote reading or independent thought, Channel One promotes television and conformity. It should be banned from the classroom. To learn more about Channel One, check out the following links:
A model School Board resolution to expel Channel One (pdf file)
Resources from Commercial Alert
FAIR Article: News for a Captive Audience
By Jamie York
As you study Social Science -- learning, perhaps, the names, dates and strategies of Civil War battles or the names of ships destroyed during the attack on Pearl Harbor -- consider this history lesson: Human history does not happen in isolation. There are always a series of traceable historical causes that lead up to a historical event. This is called the concept of "historical causation."
Take 9/11 for example.
To listen to the mass media explain it, 9/11 was only about Osama bin Laden and this vague, undefined concept of "terrorism," but we do not hear much about other causative factors that led to 9/11.
During the 1980s, Osama bin Laden was fighting the Russians in Afghanistan and the U.S. government was supplying him with heat-seeking stinger missiles and cash to ensure a Soviet defeat and continued Western influence in this strategically important region. Bin Laden, a wealthy Islamic fundamentalist from Saudi Arabia, used part of this cash to build fundamentalist religious schools (aka "Taliban") in Pakistan. Much of Bin Laden's fundamentalist anger at the U.S. stems from the establishment of U.S. military bases on Saudi soil during the 1991 Gulf War, so it may not be a simple coincidence that 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudis. President Bush met with Saudi Prince Bandar at the White House shortly after 9/11, so more questions remain: Was Saudi Arabia's role in the 9/11 attacks ruled out prematurely by President Bush? Did the Bush family's profitable business ties with the Bin Ladens and Prince Bandar in any way influence his decision to rule out Saudi Arabia as a participant in 9/11? How were the identities and pictures of the hijackers available so quickly after the attacks unless they were already known in advance?
If you add Osama bin Laden's fundamentalist anger to other factors, such as the desire of Big Oil companies for a Caspian Sea pipeline through Afghanistan, the Taliban's refusal to permit such a pipeline, the political tension within the Saudi royal family over U.S. military bases on Saudi soil, and the failure of President Bush to publicize intelligence reports predicting a terrorist attack using planes as weapons, then you begin to see of web of possible causes. Painting a target on the face of Osama bin Laden is an understandable reaction to the widespread fear after 9/11, but this is the type of reaction that fueled the rush to war in Afghanistan. The mass media dutifully reported on White House and Pentagon press conferences, but did not discuss the complex issue of causation. Osama bin Laden was likely involved in financing the 9/11 attacks, but his anger at the U.S. for its military intrusion into Saudi Arabia was only part of the equation. [Note: Some folks are predicting that another 9/11-style attack on the U.S. will occur before the 2004 presidential election, creating even more fear among the populace and handing George W. Bush an easy election victory. Let's hope they are wrong.]
How will 9/11 be covered in history textbooks? Will it include a fair examination of possible causative factors or will it omit or undermine them in favor of the simplified mass media version? Historical causation is a concept not often spoken of outside of academia, but the following history links may be helpful:
Professor Carl Gustavson's "Causation"
Causation in history -- Why do things happen?
Causation: Chain reaction or web of intrigue?
AHA criteria for standards in history
Excerpt from "A People's History of the United States"
By Jamie York
As oil wars and global warming threaten to propel our small world and its inhabitants into an epoch of utter chaos, we Americans must decide which side we want to be on. Do we continue to support the status quo warmongers in our government as they pursue their farcical "war on terrorism" or do we build a bold new foreign policy based on generosity, mutual cooperation, social and economic justice, respect for human rights and the pursuit of peace?
The 9/11 terrorist attacks left many of us feeling confused and uneasy about what is in store for us. Our politicians offer nothing but grim predicitons of long-term conventional wars -- and possibly even nuclear wars -- as we seek to control the world's ever-shrinking oil reserves by forcing oil producing nations into submission to Big Oil. All of this, of course, is foisted upon us under the guise of fighting supposed "terrorists," "insurgents," "rebels," "militants," "guerrillas," "gunmen," "militiamen," -- or whatever other convenient media labels are chosen for those who dare to oppose U.S. imperialism.
Outside of university areas, there are few public discussions regarding these matters of urgent importance. The mass media do not aid public discourse; rather, they hinder it by talking down to us and telling us what to think. They hinder discourse by failing to provide factual background information, by omitting key points, and then by diverting our attention away from political news to sports, primetime entertainment and advertising. We are treated like dumb sheep, herded from pen to pen at the will of the status quo politicians and their mass media.
As part of so-called "war on terrorism," President Bush has launched all-out, neo-conservative assault on the rights and freedoms guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution. Although many court battles can be expected, President Bush claims the right to round up American citizens deemed "illegal combatants" and to interrogate and detain them without due process. Foreign nationals who are arrested in the war on terrorism have no constitutional protections whatsoever and may be secretly locked up, subjected to psychological torture, and denied access to legal counsel and telephones -- all without any charges being filed against them.
Under the USA Patriot Act, passed by Congress with little discussion or dissension and signed into law by President Bush, federal agencies (i.e., Big Brother) can listen in on your private telephone conversations and read your email without telling you or charging you with any crime. Libraries, too, are now required by law to disclose to federal agencies the titles of books you have been reading.
These are just some of the reactionary, unconstitutional measures adopted after 9/11 -- not to make us any safer from terrorists -- but to spy on us in case we would decide to organize our efforts into a political movement capable of challenging our corporate-driven government. It seems that our government is not afraid of the terrorists; it is afraid of us. And Patriot II, a bill that would further strip citizens of their constitutional rights, is already in the works in spite of growing opposition.
As today's youth, it is your responsibility to take the lead in the fight to preserve and expand democracy. You can do this by educating yourself, by focusing your efforts on specific issues of social justice and environmental responsibility. Form after-school political groups; write articles for your student newspaper; build a web site; organize community teach-ins, marches and antiwar demonstrations; discuss democratic issues such as the need for open debates as a vital part of public discourse; practice non-violent civil disobedience; educate your parents (who may have already succumbed to media-driven fear-mongering). Act -- don't react. Your future depends on it and our planet depends on you. Here are some links you may find helpful:
Bill of Rights Defense Committee
Free Expression Policy Project
By Jamie York
Education has long been an issue in presidential elections even though the burden of school funding has largely been placed upon individual communities and states. Nevertheless, in campaign 2000, the Republicans said the Democrats were responsible for the education "recession" and the Democrats fired back that the Republicans were responsible for the education "depression." Both parties talked about "issues" such as hiring quality teachers, student testing, school accountability, vouchers, tax credits and school choice. Give me a break! Such empty rhetoric merely treats education as a free market commodity and offers no specific solutions for ensuring a quality public education for our children. If schools are run by private companies -- instead of being governed on behalf of the public good -- then the private companies can limit access and charge high prices. This is already happening in higher education.
Perhaps we, as a society -- and certainly the Democratic and Republican politicians -- have forgotten what a public education is supposed to be, so we have to ask: What is the purpose of education? Well, first, education should prepare us for citizenship so that we may become active, free-thinking participants in the decision-making process of our government and be able to make informed, reasoned choices as social advocates and as voters. Second, education should prepare us for the real world of life after high school as we seek jobs, begin careers, open bank accounts, have children of our own, purchase homes, or go on to college.
The behavior of children in the classroom has changed drastically and an estimated 11 million children nationwide are taking behavior-modifying drugs such as Ritalin and Prozac. I do not know if this change in behavior is due to chemicals in the food supply, air pollution, or whatever, but it is clear that today's children learn mostly from commercial television, computers, and their peers. They see world events happen in real time -- live on television -- so they are no longer interested in the linear sequence of events presented in textbooks. Perhaps the primary focus of education beyond the three R's should be on teaching children how to learn, how to apply what they learn, how to participate directly, and how to ask questions., rather than on proficiency tests as required by President Bush's misnamed "No Child Left Behind" Act. As a grade 7-12 substitute teacher, I have noticed that the morning classes are far better behaved than the afternoon classes, so unless more teachers are hired and class sizes are reduced by half, perhaps the core classes should be given in the morning, with the afternoons dedicated to team sports, music, chorus, art and homework. Or, perhaps, with a longer school year, homework should be increased and afternoon classes should be eliminated altogther. Summer classes offering music, art, chorus and team sports can be staggered to coincide with family vacations.
These are mere starting points for discussion as we search collectively for a new paradigm in education. Most of us will agree that the coursework needed to fulfill the purpose of education should focus first on the basics, including math, reading, writing, science and humanities, but these subjects alone do not fulfill the purpose of education. We also need practical courses that teach us how to survive in the real world. I can hear the politicians screaming already, but the following subjects should somehow become a part of every school curriculum. In my experiences, these are what I see missing most in myself and in others I have observed.
These subjects, perhaps combined into a single course, should be required in grammar school, junior high and high school. Students will learn how to feel good about themselves, how to develop healthy friendships, how to handle intimacy, how to handle bullies, and how to disagree and resolve conflicts with each other peacefully. There is entirely too much arguing and fighting in the hallways.
At least one course on this subject should be required in high school. Students will learn what foods and combinations of foods are necessary to provide adequate nutrition and promote good health. The focus of this course will be on how to eat right, prepare food safely, and maintain good health so that the student will make fewer trips to the health care facilities later in life. Vegetarianism and the controversy over the use of dietary supplements will also be discussed in this course. Students will also learn some basic first aid and medical assessment skills.
One high school course on this subject should be required. In today's world, one needs a certificate, a license, a degree, or at least some formal training, to do just about anything, but anyone can be a parent without any preparation or guidance whatsoever. This class will teach basic parenting skills and will include caring for newborns, early childhood development, discipline, setting limits, allowing choices, communicating parental expectations and consequences, and consistent follow-through.
One high school course on this subject should be required. Concepts of right and wrong vary greatly from one culture to another and from one religion to another. The differences and similarities between these value systems, as well as moral dilemmas, will be discussed openly and honestly so that all students understand healthy value systems. The intention of this course is not to indoctrinate students into a particular value system, such as Christianity, but this course will teach and discuss the range of value systems that exist in today's world. A student who learns only one value system in the home will not be prepared for encounters with other cultures and, thus, will not be prepared to make informed decisions later in life.
While advanced math classes such as algebra and geometry are often required courses, students can graduate from high school without knowing how to set up a simple household budget and balance a checkbook. This course will fill that void and will also discuss banking, personal loans and credit so that students know what to expect after graduation and can avoid getting into trouble with credit cards.
Current history and government classes often focus on memorizing the dates of historical events and the names of key participants, but they fail to provide students an understanding of the historical context in which those events occurred. Every human event, every war, every revolution, every social upheaval, every labor strike, has a traceable cause -- a series of events leading up to it. This course will teach students how to trace this causation analytically so that they may better understand how previous events have shaped our world into what it is today and how today's events are shaping tomorrow's world. If only one history class is required in school, this should be it.
As part of this new model for education, I propose that school systems invest in after-school community centers. These centers, open Sunday through Thursday from 3 p.m. until 10 p.m. and on Friday and Saturday from 5 p.m. until 1:00 a.m., would provide a safe, positive place for students to gather. There would be a quiet study room, with teachers or tutors available throughout the evening to assist students with problems. There would also be a computer room for internet research, a gaming room offering video games, pool tables, cards and chess, and a large social room for weekend dances and live music. Soft drinks, juices, and a light menu would be available. There might even be a low power radio station -- with a range of about one mile -- so students can play CDs, learn about broadcasting, and provide local news and opinion to the community. The center might also publish a small monthly newsletter to keep the community informed about scheduled events and happenings.
If we really want to fix the public school system in the United States and give our children the best education in the world, then we will need to reduce class sizes, hire more teachers and counselors, and restore federal funding to public schools. Making communities and states responsible for school funding was a political ploy in the name of reducing so-called "entitlement" spending by what was referred to as "big government," but the reality is that the money is still being spent, but not on education or social programs. Rather, it is being spent on corporate welfare and the military. There's the rub. Do we want the best schools in the world or do we want to continue creating the best weapons of mass destruction in the world? We can't have it both ways. I cast my vote for cutting the military budget and for restoring federal funding to our public school system.
Click here to send us your favorite links!
