Corporate Censorship In Public Schools

In today’s market driven society children can’t escape ads and their marketers, even their schools are filled with the advertiser’s products distracting the youth from learning.

According to “Freedom of Speech” by Gerald Leinwand, Abraham Lincoln once asked, “Must a government, of necessity, be too strong for the liberties of its people, or too weak to maintain its own existence (7)?” This question is particularly appropriate when considering what is perhaps the most sacred of all our Constitutionally guaranteed rights, freedom of expression. Lincoln knew well the potential dangers of expression, having steered the Union through the bitterly divisive Civil War, but he held the Constitution dear enough to protect its promises whenever possible (8).

The word censorship is from the Latin word root of censere, which means to give an opinion or expression to be judged upon. Censorship is the restriction of certain material, and due to its expression it is seen offensive to someone else. The origin of expression of censorship can be tracked back to the Roman Empire when Roman officials assessed the conduct and attitudes of other Roman citizens. The Roman government viewed that in order to have a strong government, the behavior and conduct of the peopled had to be changed according to what they thought was correct. Censorship continued to be a controversy over time. It remained a controversy over time, through many empires, the age of Enlightenment, World War II, and even today. As censorship progressed through the ages it still continues today. Today, censorship occurs at schools. It occurs in libraries, classrooms, and even in student publications. Even though censorship can occur to a certain extent at schools, students’ First Amendment rights are still protected at school. The First Amendment protects freedom of expression, speech, press, religion, and assembly. Students are allowed to express themselves freely at school as long as they do not affect the education and as long as it is not an activity supported by the school system.

There is a book out there that talks about a topic that you do not agree with. While you may find the book offensive, others may find it inspiring or a reflection of their life. These varying points of view are what often lead to people calling for a ban of a certain book in a school or public library. This brings to light a topic that impacts all of us in one way or another, censorship in the form of book bans. This leads to a topic that can be the center of debate for many, whether or not we should allow the censorship of books, or other forms of media, in our libraries. And by censoring books, we are referring to taking them off of the shelves. Of course, many people have strong opinions on this. Coincidentally, I also have an opinion. My opinion is that we should not censor books, while making you understand why the idea of censorship in our school and public libraries goes against the fundamental values and freedoms that we hold dearly as citizens of the United States.

In the article, Every nook & nanny: the dangerous spread of commercialized culture, written by Gary Ruskin and Juliet Schor, the authors argue how corporations have had great influence on schools, television, movies, internet and other forms of media culture through advertising. Prior to 1989, advertising was not accepted in schools. Chris Whittle convinced schools to accept adverting by offering to loan TV sets providing children to view 10 minutes a day of news, banter and at least two minutes of advertisements through Channel One. Food and beverage companies soon entered the schools with ‘sponsored educational materials’ fed in their TV advertisements to the mass audience. Companies began ‘Ad creep’ because

And then there was high school. This is the first generation that came of age in the era of rampant advertising in the schools, as well as Channel One, the news program piped into schools complete with advertisements. As a Generation Xer who graduated from high school in 1988, I recall very few ads in school. A relatively short time later, the hallways, lunchrooms, and sports facilities of cash-strapped schools frequently are sponsored by corporations. When I ask students if this happened in their schools, they supply never-ending examples: stadiums dotted by Nike swooshes, lunchrooms filled with Pizza Hut and Chic Fil-A, a back-to-school party sponsored by Outback Steakhouse, even book covers sponsored by corporations. Then, of course, there’s the prom. Eschewed by some of my Gen X counterparts, the prom is back and bigger than ever, teaching future brides and grooms

Almost everyone in high school has a Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, or Vine and large companies are taking advantage of that. “Another element of rhetoric that can be taken advantage of through social media is pathos. For example, many charitable campaigns are started through Facebook using emotional persuasion to gather more support. These campaigns draw on personal experiences with the cause, sympathy, and empathy to influence Facebook users to join the campaign and spread awareness through status updates.” (Peterson par 4) If students are shown how to recognize rhetorical strategies then they can know not to fall for the persuasion. Kids can stop being so influenced by the media and start thinking for themselves. If the new generation can learn to analyze commercials and advertisements then they can understand marketing ploys and the companies end

Knowledge is power. Using knowledge, people can reshape society and the world as a whole, changing it for the better. However, gaining access to the necessary wealth of information requires a full education: people should be taught multiple ideologies and topics from an unbiased perspective. They must receive access to various viewpoints in their entirety. Teaching only one worldview strips students of their ability to truly analyze the world and its issues, because they cannot look beyond the one restrictive narrative they learned and therefore cannot develop their own perspective. Censorship hinders schools, institutions with the purpose of informing students and helping them develop their beliefs. Therefore, schools should not practice censorship when selecting literature for students because censorship obscures the purpose of literature, because censorship fails to expose students to a variety of ideas, and because censorship removes students’ ability to develop unique opinions and worldviews; education should provide an unbiased view of the world and many ideologies, so students can take their own stance on various issues rather than blindly following what they learn.

I believe that books play a key role in school so they shouldn’t be banned.

“The Diary of Anne Frank”, “The Catcher and the Rye” and “Gone With The Wind” are examples of some famous books that have been made unavailable to students in public schools. These books, along with many others have culturally shaped America. Future students will now grow up without the knowledge these books have given past generations. This is due to censorship. According to Vocabulary.com “To censor is to review something and to choose to remove or hide parts of it that are considered unacceptable.” In public schools censorship is a big problem. The schools district will take a book out of students education because the books themes does not fit in with their ideals. Other times, a parent will complain because a book is being taught that does not support their religious beliefs. Public Schools should not censor literature based on intolerance for other viewpoints, because it disadvantages students education by not exposing them to world issues.

This, effectively, turns a school environment from one of education to one mimicking the slick advertisements that we see daily plastered on everything from cars to public bathrooms and everything in between. In a rebuttal to writer Sean McCollum as it pertains to the pros and cons of corporate sponsorship in public schools, writer Joanna Blythman details one effect that corporate sponsorship can have:

When corporations sell their products in schools it is both beneficial for the consumer and seller. For example Frisco High School has Snapple vending machines places all around the school for purchase. This allows students to enjoy a drink while they finish their school day. The purchase of a product could

They might take into consideration that in an episode of the American animated sitcom, The Simpsons, Springfield Elementary signed a contract with a vending machine company that places very unhealthy foods in them. Nearly every child in the school becomes addicted, even brainwashed by the sugary treats, including the main protagonist Bart. Eventually, Bart becomes overweight from eating an excessive amount of candy, has a heart attack, and is placed in “fat camp”. The main message of this episode was to make the viewers aware of what they but into their bodies will have either a good or bad effect on them. But what many people see is an “evil” corporation that only cares about selling their products than the students. Yes, there are many companies and corporations where their top priority is is make money, but it’s the school and school districts job to know who is influencing their students and how it is influencing them in a positive and healthy

What would you do if you went to your child's school and saw that they were looking at inappropriate material on the internet? Would you react the same way if they were in a public library? Who decides what is okay for your children to view? Who decides where they can view it? What can you do about them being able to view these things? Are there any laws that can prevent this from happening? What are some schools and libraries doing to help prevent children form looking at such material? These are all issues that will be discussed in the next few paragraphs, along with my opinions on the matter.

Monkey see, monkey do, a simple phrase relevant to today’s society. Those in society that simply do not know any better, such as children, are inclined to imitate what they see being done. Without censorship daily television shows are increasingly exhibiting more violence, foul language and sexuality to susceptible youth. Due to lack of censorship, explicit music lyrics and inappropriate images on music videos are being introduced to impressionable children. There is a lack of control on the internet leading to internet addiction and forces vulnerable adolescents to face cyber bullying. In a variety of mediums not enough censorship is used, which influences impressionable youth to think and behave negatively.