A socialist education
From the New York Times:
President Obama’s plan to deliver a speech to public school students on Tuesday has set off a revolt among conservative parents, who have accused the president of trying to indoctrinate their children with socialist ideas and are asking school officials to excuse the children from listening.
[...]
“The thing that concerned me most about it was it seemed like a direct channel from the president of the United States into the classroom, to my child,” said Brett Curtis, an engineer from Pearland, Tex., who said he would keep his three children home.
“I don’t want our schools turned over to some socialist movement.”
Obviously, the whole “argument” over whether Obama’s speech to students on Tuesday will be rife with socialist rhetoric is now completely debunked. The White House released the full speech today, and it’s far from a call to arms for some kind of child-led socialist revolution. Rather, Obama encourages kids to try their best, no matter their economical, geographical, or physical circumstances. So, that’s that. Easiest blog ever.
Oh wait! There’s something else.
The idea of messages being beamed into classrooms across the country is a scary one. Who wants children to be exposed to messages over which parents and teachers have little control? Nobody. Right?
At the risk of being labeled a socialist myself, I’ll bet that Channel One – the nationwide, 12-minute teen “news” program shown in some US schools, and subject of much scrutiny over the years – would be enough to combat any “socialist” speech from the President. The channel’s “news” is often product-related and many of its special segments are sponsored by corporations (like AT&T) or, as in the case of Glory Road, the US Army.
As Naomi Klein wrote in 2000’s No Logo:
Channel One, meanwhile, charges advertisers top dollar for accessing its pipeline to classrooms… because, with mandatory attendance and no channel-changing or volume control, it can boast something no other broadcaster can: “No audience erosion.”
The channel also offers teachers complimentary discussion topics for their classes that revolve around that day’s program. The September 3rd program, for example, (script available to download here) features a report on the decline of Abercrombie & Fitch sales during the current recession. Reporter Steven Fabian informs students that A&F had considered lowering prices, but were worried that it would affect the perceived quality of the label. It’s all very serious “business” news, of course. And the related questions for teachers to discuss with students? Just as serious:
- Why has Abercrombie and Fitch decided against lowering its prices?
- What impact has the recession had on Abercrombie and Fitch?
- Why is Abercrombie considering a change in strategy?
OMG, I dunno, yo! But totes going to Abercrombie during spare!
The impact of product placement in schools has been the topic of endless debate, but it seems even more fitting to discuss it now, when everyone’s panicking over how Obama’s message will affect the political leanings of six-year-olds. If parents are really going to put any serious thought into what kind of messages their children are privy to a school, maybe they should start at the Coke machine.
But just so we leave on a completely twisted note, I’ll say one more thing about Channel One:
The other day on his show, Glenn Beck went on a nine-minute diatribe about “socialist” and “fascist” artwork at Rockefeller Center in New York City – the home, he was eager to point out, of his most hated rival network, NBC.
Beck has been one of the more vocal distributors of the idea that Obama’s education speech is a tool of indoctrination, and will dedicate his entire show on Tuesday to the topic of “education indoctrination.”
As of 2007, Channel One’s news content has been provided by – you guessed it – NBC News.
Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.
Hmmm…. so if Bush did this you’d be OK with it? I call bull…
Nobody, President included, has the right to bypass parental involvement and speak directly to our children. The message wasn’t an issue… this time. It’s a dangerous assumption to think this or any other president will not say something that can be misconstrued as political.
But hey… I don’t expect you to get that based on how pathetic this piece was.
People bypass parental involvement and speak directly to your children all the time. It’s called advertising, major motion pictures, television, magazines, video games, music, music videos, game shows, professional sports, teachers, other kids, etc. etc.
I take your point and also find the “news” directed at children in school a la Ambercrombie appalling.
But…what if the Canadian PM did this? Do you not think there would be a similar sense of outrage or at least concern? Or Sarkozy or Gordon Brown or Angela Merkel?
Set aside partisan concerns (rabid in the U.S.), and the issue of one-sided political access, as a principle, is worth questioning, no? Especially to kids, who are already bombarded by authority-driven messages as it is and who can’t exactly turn off the TV (as they can with ads) if they don’t want to listen to Obama.
Yes, I agree to an extent that one-way political messages are dangerous… obviously history’s shown that to be the case.
It’s tough, because while I don’t want to sound like I support one-sided political speeches, I think we’re sort of giving Obama a bit too much credit here. In the end, the influence of his speech will either be heightened or tempered – or should be – by parents. That’s sort of the case with any one-way message (whether kids ‘can’ turn it off or not – they usually don’t): someone has to be a moderator. If sending your kid to school to hear the president speak is counter to your political beliefs, then tell them that, but don’t censor the message itself.
And, to be honest, I’m betting that what Obama said is now lost in the noise of everything else and been diluted by anything from teachers to other kids, to Kanye West on the VMAs.
Sustained one-way political messages aimed directly at kids would be worrying. One per school year? Nah.