It’s the best idea I’ve heard in a while.
But now that Cherry Creek School District has decided to carry advertisements on the side of school buses, we’re going to hear plenty of bellyaching from those who recoil in horror at the mere mention of the word “corporation.”
Overwrought complaints about “children being sold” to the highest bidder have already popped up. (Rule of thumb: If you’re going to sell your children, it would be almost immoral not to sell them to the highest bidder.)
There are some things even more heinous than haggling over the price of your kid. Take Wal-Mart, for instance.
Imagine the kerfuffle we’re in for should Wal-Mart attempt to advertise on the side of one of those unsightly yellow school buses.
Evil corporation! How dare you keep lowering prices on school supplies!
In Colorado, where school budgets increase every year thanks to Amendment 23, the revenue generated by this project does seem relatively modest.
Cherry Creek officials estimate that the ads will raise a bit under $100,000 in the first year and then increase to almost $400,000 within three. Is it worth it?
James O’Connell, a partner at Media Advertising in Motion, the group that manages and sells the ad space, believes that the money is more meaningful than most people realize.
“What it really represents,” O’Connell maintains, “is $400,00 in revenue, or 10 beginning teachers’ salaries. So it’s really something that does have significant value for schools and the community.”
Of course, struggling schools – and you’ll notice that the word “struggling” is always affixed to the word “school” as if a symbiotic relationship existed – must find creative ways to generate extra funds, which in this case, is a perfectly harmless, real-world alternative.
And don’t worry. The really bloodcurdling conglomerates – the ones that actually have the nerve to try sell cool stuff to kids – are shut out of the lucrative school-bus advertising game.
The types of advertisers Media Advertising in Motion is looking for, O’Connell explains, are “local” and “responsible.”
“We want to make sure that the community is on board,” O’Connell contends. “And school districts have school board members that understand the community, and they are looking out to make sure they are protecting the kids.”
O’Connell, who has worked with school districts for 35 years, says, typically he finds parents and community leaders are positive about the ads and the revenue they produce.
“Realistically, we really promote community advertising,” he goes on. “It is going to be child-appropriate, but it isn’t necessarily geared toward the child.”
But suppose districts did sell advertisement that was geared toward children? What exactly are we protecting them from? Cellphones? If we’re going to sell the bus space, why not sell it to the highest G-rated bidder?
Media Advertising in Motion could approach corporations about ads in textbooks – “Target Algebra 101” textbooks, for instance – with the caveat that the company pay for the whole batch.
Yes, I know. What about “corporate Amerikkka” and “crass commercialism” invading our schools? Sometimes, you have to wonder if those who throw these platitudes around are serious.
Do enlightened parents drive their precious ones around in corporate-made Toyota Priuses? (or is it Priusi?) Or do they travel around in homemade snowshoes and mules?
Do they use roots and berries to soothe their ailing children, or pharmaceutical products sold by corporations?
Do they purchase nutritious foods – fortified, by a corporation, with fibers and vitamins – or do they forage, hunt and barter for their soy products?
Who are all those people in the Starbucks? On those laptops and cellphones? With those iPods and BlackBerrys?
Now, we needn’t send our kids to corporate boot camp, but they’re savvy enough to live through a couple of ads on the bus. You never know, they may even find a good deal occasionally.
David Harsanyi’s column appears Monday and Thursday. Reach him at 303-820-1255 or dharsanyi@denverpost.com.
