I just read this Globe and Mail article called “Advertising on video screens in high schools worries critics” by John Lorinc, about the possibility of video screens being placed in high schools. I can understand why some people are having a hard time with this concept. It has its pros and cons. Firstly, it would be great to advertising educational information to the teen market, but how long would this remain “non-commercial.” It could innocently start with the Milk marketing campaign, and grow to the suggested advertisements for colleges and universities, but then what? The reporter implies that once the door is open “it’s a slippery slope.” Marketers are probably salivating at the thought of advertising to the mass teen market. Teens have a great deal of buying power, look at the success of Twilight by Stephenie Meyer.
I am sure teens would really embrace the idea of video screens, as another opportunity to interact with technology. Teens today, are great at multi-tasking. I see kids and teens on their cell phones, iPODs and laptops – at the same time. I guess one way to look at it, is video screens are another way to interact and get connected.
The article also reminds us about the Future Shop deal for $100,000 proposed for the school’s media lab a while ago. I remember reading about that in the news and don’t believe it went through, either way it does bring up the question of funding school ventures. Apparently, Future Shop wanted the labs to be painted in the store’s corporate colours of red and grey. I guess another way to look at this is from a funding point of view. With funding sources shrinking, we will have to look for alternate sources of funding, and that may come in the form or corporate sponsorship.
I guess it’s a fine balancing act. Check out the full article by clicking the source link below.
