Branded lessons creep into class

By DITA DE BONI marketing writer

Most criticism of advertising to children has centred on television commercials liberally sprinkled between cartoons.

Advertisers and channels have made some headway in agreeing to limit the advertising in "tweenie time," but there is more than one way to skin a cat.

Schools, increasingly expected to find alternative financing, are snapping up branded "educational" materials.

The idea behind marketing brands through educational institutions is, inevitably, imported from the United States, where corporate branding in schools has saturated everything from lunches to stationery in some areas.

But branded "educational" materials are an even closer step to the target market.

For example, one of the main bogeys in the United States has been an increase in materials that question the scientific basis of environmental regulation.

Procter & Gamble, the world's largest fast-moving consumer goods company, has distributed packages entitled Decision Earth to more than 75,000 schools, in which it is claimed, among other things, that disposable nappies are no worse for the environment than cloth ones.

The US Beef Industry Council spent $US425,000 ($1.03 million) on kits designed to "teach" children about the positive environmental impact of beef farming and ranching - neglecting to mention overgrazing or pollution - in a pitch to reverse falling red meat consumption.

The same sorts of materials have been provided by oil, pharmaceutical and nuclear energy companies.

Australian professor Sharon Beder, writing in the School Science Review in 1998, quotes Lifetime Learning Systems, a company responsible for compiling educational materials, as informing potential clients that "kids spend 40 per cent of each day in the classroom where traditional advertising can't reach them ... Now you can enter the classroom through custom-made learning materials created with your specific marketing objectives in mind ...

"Let Lifetime Learning Systems bring your message to the classroom, where young people are forming attitudes that will last a lifetime.

"Coming from school, all these materials carry an extra measure of credibility that gives your message added weight," the company says

"Imagine millions of students discussing your product in class.

"Imagine their teachers presenting your organisation's point of view."

As cash-strapped schools in the US, Canada and Australia accept these materials with open arms - some reasoning that children in a capitalist state must be inured to advertising in general - New Zealand schools may be in for an avalanche of corporate saviours.

An Education Ministry official told the Business Herald that there were no formal guidelines about what materials schools could or could not accept.

Principals and school boards are charged with judging materials case by case.

Curriculum Division senior manager Colin Brown says a host of material is obtained from sources other than the state.

"I would think that schools might also see the branded materials as part of a learning experience to talk about advertising and branding, for example, and learn a conscious way of looking at the things these companies supply to schools and why."

But Education Minister Trevor Mallard recently advised boards and principals to be wary of a "free, decision-making publication" entitled I've got the Power, targeted at 12 and 13-year-olds and linked to the health and physical education curriculum. It was financed by cigarette company Philip Morris.

One resource also linked to the new health and PE curriculum is the Milo Marvellous Me kits, which a spokeswoman at Nestle (who declined to be named) said had been snapped up by more than 1000 primary schools where a "gap in materials existed."

The Milo kit contains worksheets for children about themselves, information on nutrients that mentions Milo alongside other foods and some exercise drills, all featuring the Milo brand, as well as recipes containing the drink.

Other materials - coloured Milo green - are less branded and contain information about the body and the importance of nutrition.

"We decided we wanted to do something for schools," says the Milo spokeswoman.

"We fax the schools to ask if they want it and we certainly don't push it, but we've had wonderful feedback and teachers seem to like it, too."

But why go to schools at all? "Because that's where our target market is."

The materials were written in conjunction with Milo by Catherine Ryan-Salter, of Lindenberg and Partners, who says one of the considerations in putting the kits together was that many children go to school without eating breakfast.

"Nestle research shows that Milo is present in many homes, including low socio-economic homes ... I hope this doesn't sound like a marketing pitch. What I really want to get across is that children actually do benefit from this type of tonic drink in the morning," she says.

But Geoff Lealand, a professor and children's advertising expert at the University of Waikato, says parents probably will not be too troubled by the association between Milo and the school, as Milo has a "benevolent, feel-good association with sport."

"Every venture has to be judged on its merits but should be closely scrutinised all the same," he says.

Anything that links activities outside school to those within - such as drinking Milo - is bound to be successful, says Dr Lealand.

Of course, the final word from many critics is that if schools were properly funded, the issue would not be an issue. Dr Lealand agrees.

"Principals are always on the lookout for extra money for resources.

"They'll just have to be vigilant about what they take."