May 24, 2001
Dear Representative:
This is a dirty letter. I do not apologize.
The person who should apologize is Jack Abramoff of Greenberg
and Traurig, the Washington lobbyist for the controversial in-school
marketing company called Channel One. I am just telling you what
his client is doing to our children.
Channel One is aggressively advertising
extremely vulgar movies to a captive audience of schoolchildren
down to age 12.
This February 1st, students were compelled
to watch a commercial for "Head Over Heels." This movie
earned its PG13 rating ("Parents strongly 
WIDTH=”352″ HEIGHT=”190″ ALIGN=”LEFT” BORDER=”0″ NATURALSIZEFLAG=”0″>cautioned.")
for sexual content, profanity and violence.
To give you an idea of how vulgar this movie
was, here are just two scenes.
There is an extended bestiality sight gag
when a Great Dane knocks down the main character and mounts her
– twice – in a hotel lobby. The woman’s skirt is up and the dog
is so huge that it gives the appearance of a man having sex with
a woman from behind. When she gets up off the floor she tells
the dog’s owner (her future sexual partner) that despite the attack
she was happy to meet him and his "huge dong." She realizes
what she said and corrects herself. She says, "I mean your
huge dick." Finally, she says the word "dog."
There is also an extended anal sex joke
for the kids. Several women run into a restroom to hide from someone.
They are standing on a toilet in a stall, when two maintenance
workers enter the restroom to clean out a drain. The women only
know that two men have entered a stall and don’t know what they
are doing.
They hear this dialogue:
"Whip that bad boy out" (referring to the pipe snake
they’re going to use.)
"That is huge," the other says.
"I’m going to stick it in now."
When one is poked by the other he says, "Ow…be careful."
The other says that he has stuffed it into "tighter holes
than this."
One man yells, "It’s going to blow!"
Then the women are covered with sewage as it sprays up from the
toilet they are standing on.
That is a very appropriate image because
this Channel One-advertised movie drenched our children in filth.
The rest of the vulgarity is at https://obligation.org/article.php?recordID=618
This sex comedy made big money for Universal
Pictures, who in turn paid Channel One for promoting it to schoolchildren,
who in turn paid Jack Abramoff to do what he does so well.
HEIGHT=”182″ ALIGN=”LEFT” BORDER=”0″ NATURALSIZEFLAG=”0″>In February,
Mr. Abramoff’s client played a very nasty joke on students. They
advertised "Monkeybone." The term is slang for "penis"
and this entire movie was about a cartoonist who battles with
his penis that is symbolized by an obnoxious animated monkey.
After you read more about this movie at www.obligation.org/monkeybone.html
you will want to take a shower.
In December, "Dude, Where’s My Car?"
was advertised to kids.
This PG13 movie glamorized two potheads
that get so stoned one night that they can’t remember what they
did the night before. Not only can’t 
WIDTH=”244″ HEIGHT=”161″ ALIGN=”LEFT” BORDER=”0″ NATURALSIZEFLAG=”0″>they
remember where their car is, but also they don’t know why the
strippers at the Kitty Kat Club all know them so well. Kids who
went to see this movie because their public school advertised
it saw a lot of strippers, wet tee shirts and an attractive "woman"
with a very prominent bulge in her g-string. The transvestite
joke runs throughout the movie.
There are five space women thrown into this
movie for even more sexual excitement. They want the potheads
to find something for them. One of the women takes a Popsicle
and simulates giving oral sex to get their attention. The women
promise "oral pleasure" to the stoners.
"Smoking pot is cool" is this
movie’s message. The characters laugh about their marijuana-related
nicknames, a dog gets big laughs because he is blitzed on marijuana
and he smokes it with a pipe, and numerous inside jokes are made
about the drug-using culture. This pro-drug movie is repugnant.
Teachers and principals are in the dark about the content of the
advertised movies because they are usually advertised before the
premiere. To me, what Channel One did by promoting this movie
was almost criminal. They contributed to the delinquency of minors.
It wasn’t criminal, of course, but the next time Mr. Abramoff
dares to tell you Channel One helps to keep kids off drugs, ask
him why would Channel One advertise this drug movie.
ALIGN=”LEFT” BORDER=”0″ NATURALSIZEFLAG=”0″>Last year, Channel
One’s web site (heavily promoted on the in-school TV show) ran
a contest to get children to see the drug-and-alcohol-soaked movie
"Loser" (PG13 drug content, sexual content, profanity).
The message from this movie was clear: only if you drink, and
drink a lot, and use drugs, are you cool on campus. You are a
"loser" if you don’t binge. Also, it is cool and exciting
to slip your date the date-rape drug, Rohypnol, if you can get
away with it. (Slipping "roofies" into girls’ drinks
is part of the "charm" of this sleazeball movie for
kids.) The rest of the drugs and sex in this movie can be experienced
at www.obligation.org/loser.html.
Channel One brags about how they run anti-drug
public service announcements (PSAs) and that this is a good reason
not to kick them out, but these PSAs can be obtained free of charge
by schools without Channel One and the schools could pick which
ones are appropriate.
Several of Channel One’s PSAs are simply
irresponsible. Consider this one from this school year. A boy,
about 12, is at a party where apparently many are smoking pot.
He is sitting on a sofa when his friend offers him a marijuana
cigarette. Everybody freezes while he thinks of his response.
"What would my parents think?" His mother and father
appear in a "bubble" over his head. "What do my
parents know!" he thinks to himself and his parents are literally
jerked out of the picture. He finally says, "No thanks."
The drug using friend says, "No problem" and everyone
is happy. We see the young boy who said "No" enjoying
himself as he remains at the party sitting beside the friend who
offered the marijuana.
This may be Channel One’s idea of a "good
drug message" but I am fairly confident that it would be
difficult for you to find one parent in your state that would
not be outraged by this anti-parent drug message. The clear message
was there is no reason for a preteen to distance himself from
drug using friends as long as he doesn’t participate.
But wouldn’t you want your child or grandchild
to distance himself from drug users? Most teachers don’t have
the time or the inclination to watch this MTV-styled "news"
show. A school board forced this program on teachers back in the
early 90’s when they decided to experiment with Channel One. Those
boards are long gone and the current school boards often know
little about the program. Channel One became invisible over the
last ten years. Parents know little to nothing about this company.
Of course, Channel One has a lot of experience
in promoting violent entertainment to our children. A few weeks
after the funerals at Columbine, 
HEIGHT=”194″ ALIGN=”LEFT” BORDER=”0″ NATURALSIZEFLAG=”3″>Channel
One went ahead and honored their contract to run ads for the violent
movie "The Mummy." This movie started with a murder/suicide
and contained much human-to-human violence. While the nation bemoaned
the culture of violence that may have contributed to the deaths
of those schoolchildren, Channel One kept promoting Hollywood’s
gore.
Last year, our children sat in their classrooms
and watched a violent commercial that showed people being maimed
and killed. A creepy voice-over fills the classroom, "If
you think in space no one can hear you scream, think again."
A woman is shown screaming. The good news is the scenes of killings
were quick-cut snippets that hopefully rushed past the eyes of
children. The children were watching a commercial for the extremely
violent "Supernova" (PG13 violence, sexual content,
nudity, profanity). One reviewer said there was so much nudity
in this movie he renamed it "Flesh Gordon." See the
commercial at: https://obligation.org/channeloneallvideos.php
Channel One ran a commercial for "The
World Is Not Enough" that began with an animated gun pointed
at the class. That is a sure-fire way to get the children’s attention.
Children were told by Channel One’s commercial that seeing this
violent and sexy movie just "once, was not enough."
In order to short circuit some negative
publicity, Channel One reluctantly stopped advertising their sleazy
movies to most middle school students. They think that they should
be congratulated for this show of restraint. I think that is laughable.
If Mr. Abramoff looks you in the eye and tells you his client
is the paragon of virtue because they advertise filth only to
children 13 and older, I hope you will express your disapproval.
Mr. Abramoff has a tough job. He has to
dress up this monstrous exploiter of schoolchildren in pink ribbon
and lace and ask you to say wonderful things about it. Or Mr.
Abramoff is asking you to remain silent about his client, but
how can you be quiet about Channel One?
We need businesses to help our schools,
not to plunder them. Businesses should donate assets and services
to schools with no strings attached.
Channel
One’s onerous contract hurts our children in low-income areas
the most. In 1998, a study by the Alabama Department of Educations
showed that schools that spend the least per student overwhelmingly
have Channel One. The schools that spend the most, overwhelmingly
do not. If the program was beneficial, then the top spending schools
would have it. The truth is, schools reluctantly agree to contract
with Channel One only because they want the use of the equipment
and assume they can’t get it any other way.
Schools with Channel One waste one hour
a week, one instructional week (at least 31 hours) a year, on
this 12 to 13-minute daily commercial TV show. A child who is
under contract to Channel One from 6th grade to 12th will lose
7 instructional weeks of school passively watching commercial
TV. Mr. Abramoff sees no problem with this situation. I hope you
do.
This is not a Republican or Democrat, liberal
or conservative issue. The Eagle Forum, Focus on the Family, Family
Research Council, and the American Family Association join with
the National Education Association, National PTA, Ralph Nader’s
Commercial Alert, National Association of State Boards of Education
and other educational organizations to oppose the showing of classroom
commercials.
The Southern Baptist Convention in 1999
overwhelmingly passed an unambiguous resolution opposing Channel
One specifically. They urged school administrators and civic leaders
to do everything they can to remove Channel One from schools.
The National Council of Teachers of English
has a standing resolution that states they "oppose intrusions
of commercial television, such as Channel One, in the classroom."
To show the broad concern about Channel
One and commercialism in our schools, last month I participated
in a workshop on Channel One and school commercialism at the annual
meeting of the not-conservative Children’s Defense Fund. This
month, conservative columnist George Will condemned Channel One
and urged that schools to be commercial-free zones. Phyllis Schlafly
has spoken out against Channel One for nearly a decade. Who could
defend the practice of compelling children to watch commercials,
unless they are being paid to defend it or simply don’t
NATURALSIZEFLAG=”3″>understand the innate integrity of classrooms
and students?
This year, Channel One has started advertising
the Cobaltcard to kids down to 6th grade. This is an effort by
American Express to get children to start "carrying plastic."
It is a "buying card" that can be "loaded"
with money and then it can be used to buy products on the Internet
and at retail stores just like a credit card. The ultimate goal
is to develop a new generation of American Express credit card
users. Most parents would have a problem with their school promoting
this instant gratification, credit card-mentality to their child
… but they don’t know it’s happening.
The health of our children is seriously
endangered by the rising trend of obesity and Type II diabetes,
yet Channel One relentlessly urges kids to 
WIDTH=”117″ HEIGHT=”185″ ALIGN=”LEFT” BORDER=”0″ NATURALSIZEFLAG=”0″>consume
more Twinkies, Snickers, M&Ms, Mt. Dew, Twix candy bars, Nestle
Crunch, Pepsi, and Hostess Cupcakes – to name a few of their high-sugar
products. This doesn’t make sense. Why would we allow Channel
One time to promote any junk food they chose when we know these
products could be harmful to the health of our children?
Last year, the Alabama Chapter of the American
Academy of Pediatrics passed a resolution opposing the showing
of commercials in Alabama classrooms. A recent commentary in "Pediatrics"
by Birmingham pediatrician Dr. Carden Johnston documented the
regrettable and often unhealthy commercial messages that Channel
One delivers to our children. Two other nationally known pediatricians
wrote an article three months ago saying that Channel One helps
encourage children to make wrong lifestyle decisions.
Most secondary schools in our country have
said "No" to Channel One’s ridiculous trade of school
time for the rental of TV equipment. If you support this marketing
company, you will be taking a bold and possibly costly step that
will place you outside the mainstream.
The next time Mr. Abramoff asks you to put
your reputation on the line for his Madison Avenue/Hollywood client,
say "No thanks." If you have allowed Channel One to
use your name to promote their company, I hope you will ask that
they remove your name.
Channel One’s commercials are different
than the soft drink logo on a scoreboard, or an ad in a yearbook.
Channel One’s commercials are in the classroom. Their commercials
become part of the curriculum. They are required to be shown under
force of contract. (The Channel One contract says that a minimum
of 80% of a school’s classrooms must show their program/commercials
at least 90% of all school days and the program must be shown
in its entirety even if teachers only want to show a portion of
it.)
Channel One has said that schoolchildren
can easily "opt-out" of viewing Channel One. In the
real world, that just isn’t true. How easy is it for a 12-year-old
child to stand up among his fellow students and say he would rather
stand in the hall because his parents don’t want him to see commercials
for age-inappropriate movies, expensive athletic shoes, and junk
food? Channel One knows how peer pressure works and they are very
comfortable with "opt-out" policies. If parents had
to "opt-in" their child, then Channel One dies and Channel
One knows that.
Help your district schools find the money
to replace the old Channel One TV sets. It doesn’t take much money
at all. All of their TVs are small 19" models (too small
for most classrooms). They cost no more than $170. Remember, Channel
One only loans the TVs and the "rent payment" is one
week of school. A school with Channel One is throwing away tax
money. The average cost of one-minute of school in Alabama (in
1996) was six cents. Using this very low, old figure, a classroom
of 23 students gives up $2,600 of class time each year to pay
the rent on a $170 TV set! You don’t have to be a CPA to know
that this is a fleecing of our public schools.
Mr. Abramoff is not to be faulted for giving
you misleading and incomplete information. I, like you, understand
that a lobbyist is a paid advocate. It isn’t his job to inform
you that his client has always been outlawed, for obvious reasons,
from every public school classroom in their home state of New
York. Or that Channel One is advertising About.com (its sister
company) that has made the news because part of their site is
devoted to hardcore pornography. (Because of our efforts, About.com
has instituted an adult verification system and says they will
sell their porn some time in the future, but it is unbelievable
that our public schools are promoting a company that distributes
hardcore pornography.)
Channel One is a break from schoolwork and
some young people like that. Channel One knows how to keep its
audience happy. Recently, Channel One introduced their "All-Request
Thursday." Students vote on their favorite music, via the
Internet, and the rap artists or rock groups with the most votes
will be played on the show. The classroom rocks!
With Channel One there is no local control
over the content of one hour a week of school. If you believe
in the local control of schools, you will do all you can to expel
this disruptive and inappropriate commercial presence from America’s
classrooms.
If oppose Channel One, they will fight you.
They are making too much money to allow you or anyone to threaten
its presence in our children’s classrooms.
Public support for public education in our
country will not be enhanced by the continuing presence of Channel
One in our schools. This is a serious concern for all of us who
have children in public schools and believe in public education.
When you and I were schoolchildren, our
parents and neighbors would never have allowed this lunacy to
happen during our classroom time. Our children and grandchildren
deserve the same respect we received. I urge you to support commercial-free
public school classrooms.
Much Obliged,
Jim Metrock
President
PS My background is in business. I was a
founding board member of Alabama’s largest business association.
Channel One and their lobbyists, like Mr. Abramoff, are making
a killing off of our schoolchildren. Don’t let their exploitative
business model turn the public against responsible corporate/school
partnerships.
