Channel One--Television in the schools

[Gingersnap]

Any teachers out there familiar with Channel One (or its clones--if there are any)? I caught a glimpse of Focks News recently and after I recovered from atrophy of the brain cells I began to think about how our (American's) appetite for this stuff as "News" has grown. I don't have a tv, I should add, so I may be off base.

But it seems to me that most American adults, particularly in the post 9/11 environment are fearful of the future and of international threats to the U.S. We have a war on. People watch the news now probably more than ever, yet what passes as news, I don't have to tell this readership--is biased and superficial in the extreme.

So I got to thinking about Channel One, a "free" news broadcast created especially for secondary schools. Schools receive TVs and videoplayers (and now are moving to DTV) from Channel One in exchange for playing a Channel One product (with advertising for Pepsi, Nike, etc) every morning. Teachers are encouraged to make this an educational opportunity, thereby granting legitimacy to the idea that high gloss, info-tainment is a source of NEWS.

So any teachers out there ever watch one of these things? How do teachers feel about it? Are the broadcasts incorporated into lessons or discussion? And does anyone know how long this has been out (I found references to Channel One on a google search going back to 1991)?

[goobergunch]

1. As a student that has Ch1 in the morning...

I find that most of the teachers simply mute it.

Regarding its news value, IMHO Channel 1 is worse than Faux...back in 2000, they had some kind of mock election in which * won every state except for a few New England states :eyes:.

[JanMichael]

2. I was a substitute teacher between trips to Poland.

Back in 1995. And yes Ch.1 was on then too spewing out one commercial after another.

I muted it once I discovered that it was basically Faux News for Kids with a splash of Pepsi.

[MissouriTeacher]

3. I'm probably in the minority...

but I actually liked it. I figure it was much more news than most kids were getting anyway, and they watch enough commercials so what are a few more going to hurt?

Granted, I have never actually taught in a school that had Channel One. I only remember it as a student, so it's been quite a while since I've watched it. If they really have become like Fox News then, of course, my opinion would be different. But I don't remember any sort of conservative bias when I used to watch.

[Colin Ex]

5. I don't know about a conservative bias.

But it's the daytime soap opera of news. Stupid and trashy, with many a desperate appeal to students.

[JanMichael]

7. That's a better description than "Conservative".

Consumerist trash mostly.

But I suppose that just because I hated it doesn't necessarilly make it "evil"...

Or maybe it does:evilgrin:

[MissouriTeacher]

8. Well yeah...

but at the very least it's giving students some idea of what's going on in the world.

I certainly wouldn't want it as my sole news source, but it's better than nothing.

[Gingersnap]

9. my concern is that it may be the only exposure

that most students have to current events or news in school--which will lead them to think that TV news is okay--that Focks news is actually news. I like the earlier comment about commercial bias--I'm sure that the bias probably just reflects however the current political winds are blowing.

What about newspapers? Are students being encouraged to read those and discuss them?

[MissouriTeacher]

12. I can only speak for myself...

but I give my student extra credit points for bringing in newspaper articles that are relevant to things we're studying in class.

I have to admit most students don't bother.

And when it comes to research projects, it's always a struggle to keep them from using sources OTHER than the internet.

[tom_paine]

10. "Faux News for Kids"

Young Communists.

Hitler Youth.

Totalitarians required a vast propaganda program for the Young, lest they begin thinking for themselves.

When I close my eyes I hear the echo of jackboots that are almost certainly coming.

[Colin Ex]

4. I had to sit through it...

The teachers at my school didn't mute it, so most students just opted to either talk about stuff or read.

I remember FAIR had a report on the history and such of it awhile ago. I printed a few copies out and started distributing them amongst the student population.

Are the broadcasts incorporated? I know of one teacher who did something like that, but for the most part, the teachers saw it as a fifteen-minute break.

-C

[SheepyMcSheepster]

6. i graduated in 95

and i sat through a couple years of channel one. no talking was aloud during channel one. I actually enjoyed it for the most part. Lisa Ling was there and Anderson Cooper who i see on some major network news show in the wee hours sometimes. at the time I saw more good than bad, but times have definetly changed since then so i don't know.

[The_Gopher]

17. they always shipped anderson cooper off to the worst places...

any time something bad was going down, anderson was there.

and don't forget kathy kronenberger...she was AWESOME! (sarcasm)

i thought C1 was complete crap, i think we started watching it in 1990-1991. i remember one early segment where they showed some girl going through her massive closet, showing off all her different clothes. marxist reproduction of the consumer class? hmmm....

[Gingersnap]

11. yeah there is a FAIR

critique of it that I've seen, but it seems to be critiquing the ads more than the fact that Channel One masquerades as news.

I remember wanting to be informed when I was a young teen, but not having much of an idea how to do it (I grew up in a small town where we only got the local crappy paper). Local news was a joke--snowstorms, kidnappings, etc. I started reading Time and Newsweek and believed they were unbiased. That was back in the early 80s and I just don't remember there being very many places to turn for the young and naive. I think there is an appetite out there among young adults and teens for a manageable dose of news and I'm just scared that Focks is filling it.

I think so many of the problems we're having in the country today stem from the media, and the sad fact that most Americans who watch Focks (for the best of intentions, I'd like to think) actually think they are informed.

[goobergunch]

13. Most of the time I DU in homeroom rather than watch Channel 1 (n/t)

[jono]

14. Our school had it in 1992

I think it was pretty new then, so 1991 sounds about right. I watched it during our Language Arts/Social Studies block, which is, ironically, the only class I had in middle school where I remember studying propaganda and its effects on the population. So Channel 1 did become a talking point in our class, albeit probably not in the way that Channel 1 producers would have preferred.

Even back then it made me want to :puke:. I think at some point the school tried to ditch the broadcasts, but they were threatened that the TVs would be taken back, so after that the school turned a blind eye while teachers would shut it off en masse every morning.

[pstokely]

15. its free advertising paid by the tax payers

http://www.commercialalert.org/index.php?category_id=2&subcategory_id=32&article_id=120

[LWolf]

16. I've seen it.

I've never used it. They don't have a big presence in elementary schools. If Channel 1 was mandated at my school, my administrator would probably come around and rewire my set himself just to avoid the prolonged public battle from me. I wouldn't only mute it; I'd turn it off.

That's just what I need; my kids to spend more time watching tv than they already do, only this time it comes out of classroom instructional time.

If I wanted to look at the day's headlines, I could bring in the stack of newspapers our school gets from the local paper, along with a few Times to balance the right-wing rag a little. I could put any news website up on my big-screen computer monitor at any point in the day, according to our own schedule and need. I don't need channel one to decide what news my kids have to see, or what products they need to have embedded in their psyches.

[AP]

18. Ch. 1 operates on two principles:

(1) The captive audience.

(2) A study recently concluded that people establish most of their purchasing preferences in k-12 years. That's why you have so many friends who wear the same sweaters, shoes/sneakers, and haircust that they had senior year in high school. Apparently, it's very expensive and difficult for advertisers to get people to switch from the brands they chose in high school, regardless of the product.

Channel One (along with the coke machines in the cafeteria) are meant to help select, high-paying advertisers reach captive audiences and tie them to brands for the rest of their lifetime.

Many people don't think public schools should be teaching brand loyalty. In fact, it seems to be at odds with their real mission of creating an informed, educated public.

[donco6]

19. We just got rid of it.

Channel One is a "golden handcuffs" technique - they give you all kinds of equipment, but you have to agree to let the kids watch (if they found out you were muting, they wouldn't be happy!)

We finally pulled it out of all of our schools and replaced the equipment with our own. Our feeling was that the 15 minutes a day could be put to better use.

[MattNC]

20. its ok

but they really need to do two versions of the show: one for middle school and one for high school. too many of the stories were dumbed down or not relevant for high school.

cnn used to have a rival to channel one -- not sure if they still do or not.