A Fairly Significant List:

 Here's a nice list of all the films that cross-promoted through snack foods.  Remember, when kids are screaming at you to buy something, it's not their voice that speaking, it's the corporate mind-cloud.

H/t to AS.  Go read the full article here.

The Adventures of Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius•• (canned pastas and soups,snack chips)
American Idol•• (candy, cookies, toaster pastries)
The Ant Bully•• (QSR children’s meals, non-carbonated beverages)
Avatar•• (QSR children’s meals, fruit snacks)
The Backyardigans•• (fruit snacks, fruit)
Barbie: Fairytopia•• (breakfast cereals, toaster pastries)
Batman•• (canned pastas and soups, fruit snacks)
Blue’s Clues•• (breakfast cereals, fruit snacks, fruit, yogurt)
Care Bears•• (fruit snacks)
Cars ••(QSR children’s meals, fruit snacks, snack bars, breakfast cereals, toaster pastries, frozen waffles, canned pasta, pudding, cookies, snack crackers, popcorn, yogurt, non-carbonated beverages)
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory•• (candy)
Charlotte’s Web•• (QSR children’s meals)
The Cheetah Girls•• (macaroni and cheese)
Chicken Little ••(fruit snacks)
The Chronicles of Narnia•• (QSR children’s meals, breakfast cereals, cereal bars, snack chips, fruit snacks, toaster pastries, packaged salads)
Clifford the Big Red Dog•• (QSR children’s meals, fruit juice, snack crackers, breakfast cereal)
Curious George•• (QSR children’s meals, breakfast cereals, snack cakes, fruit juice, bananas)
Danny Phantom•• (canned pastas and soups, children’s frozen meals, frozen desserts)
Disney Princesses (breakfast cereals, fruit snacks, yogurt, frozen waffles, toaster pastries)
Doogal•• (QSR children’s meals)
Dora the Explorer•• (breakfast cereals, canned pastas and soups, snack crackers, fruit snacks, cookies, fruit, yogurt)
Dragon Booster•• (QSR children’s meals)
El Chavo animated series (cookies)
Elmo•• and other Sesame Street characters (fruits and vegetables)
The Fairly OddParents•• (snack chips, macaroni and cheese, fruit snacks, frozen desserts)
Finding Nemo•• (fruit snacks)
Flushed Away•• (QSR children’s meals, breakfast cereals, snack bars, snack crackers)
Foster’s Home for Imaginary Friends•• (QSR children’s meals)
Go, Diego, Go!•• (fruit snacks, yogurt)
Goosebumps•• (QSR children’s meals)
Happy Feet•• (QSR children’s meals, snack crackers, breakfast cereals, yogurt, fruit snacks, baked goods, carbonated and non-carbonated beverages)
Hello Kitty•• (fruit snacks)
Holly Hobbie and Friends•• (QSR children’s meals)
I Spy•• (QSR children’s meals, fruit juice)
Ice Age 2 ••(QSR children’s meals, yogurt, fruit snacks, cereal bars, breakfast cereals, toaster pastries, frozen waffles, children’s frozen meals, canned pasta, pudding, cookies, snack crackers, popcorn, carbonated and non-carbonated beverages)
King Kong ••(fruit snacks, snack cakes, cookies, carbonated beverages)
Klutz•• (QSR children’s meals)
Lady and the Tramp•• (carbonated beverages, snack cakes)
Leroy & Stitch•• (fruits and vegetables)
The Lion King ••(fruit snacks)
Little Einsteins•• (breakfast cereals)
The Little Mermaid•• (QSR children’s meals, breakfast cereals, candy)
The Littlest Pet Shop•• (QSR children’s meals)
Looney Tunes•• (QSR children’s meals, fruit snacks, fruits and vegetables)
Madagascar•• (fruit snacks)
Mickey Mouse Clubhouse•• (breakfast cereals)
Monster House•• (frozen pizza)
Monsters, Inc. ••(fruit snacks)
My Little Pony•• (fruit snacks)
¡Mucha Lucha!•• (fruit snacks, frozen desserts)
Nanny McPhee•• (food service pizza and burritos served in schools)
Nintendo characters such as Mario and Donkey Kong (QSR children’s meals)
One Tree Hill•• (carbonated beverages)
Open Season•• (QSR children’s meals, breakfast cereals, children’s frozen meals, popcorn)
Over the Hedge•• (QSR children’s meals, yogurt, snack chips, snack cakes, popcorn, carbonated and non-carbonated beverages)
Paz the Penguin•• (fruits and vegetables)
Peanuts•• (QSR children’s meals)
Pirates of the Caribbean•• (QSR children’s meals, candy, frozen waffles, fruit snacks, breakfast cereals, lunch kits, popcorn, non-carbonated beverages, fruits and vegetables)
Polar Express•• (popcorn)
Robots the Movie ••(fruit snacks)
Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer•• (breakfast cereals, snack cakes)
Rugrats•• (fruit snacks)
Scooby-Doo•• (breakfast cereals, snack crackers, macaroni and cheese, fruit snacks, yogurt)
Shrek•• (breakfast cereals, macaroni and cheese, yogurt, fruit snacks, snack crackers, cookies)
Sony PlayStation characters Spyro the Dragon and Crash Bandicoot (popcorn)
Spider-Man ••(QSR children’s meals, breakfast cereals, cereal bars, cookies, pancakes, fruit snacks, snack crackers, snack chips, sliced cheese, macaroni and cheese, frozen desserts, non-carbonated beverages)
SpongeBob SquarePants•• (QSR children’s meals, breakfast cereals, snack crackers, macaroni and cheese, lunch kits, fruit snacks, cookies, yogurt, fruits and vegetables)
Star Wars Episode III•• (fruit snacks)
Strawberry Shortcake•• (QSR children’s meals)
Stuart Little 3•• (QSR children’s meals)
Superman Returns•• (QSR children’s meals, breakfast cereals, milk, cereal bars, snack chips, snack crackers, fruit snacks, packaged pasta, carbonated and non-carbonated beverages)
Surf’s Up•• (popcorn snack)
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles•• (fruit snacks, fruit juice)
Trollz•• (QSR children’s meals)
The Wiggles•• (fruit juice)
The Wild•• (QSR children’s meals)
Winnie the Pooh•• (fruit snacks)
Winx•• (fruit snacks, fruit juice)
Xiaolin Showdown•• (breakfast cereals)
Yu-Gi-Oh!•• (QSR children’s meals)
Zoom•• (QSR children’s meals) 

So much for the information age?

The Chronicle has an article up (that I rather like but have some major problems with) about a professor's discussion regarding rendition. It's called "So Much for the Information Age."

I teach a seminar called "Secrecy: Forbidden Knowledge." I recently asked my class of 16 freshmen and sophomores, many of whom had graduated in the top 10 percent of their high-school classes and had dazzling SAT scores, how many had heard the word "rendition."

Not one hand went up.

This is after four years of the word appearing on the front pages of the nation's newspapers, on network and cable news, and online. This is after years of highly publicized lawsuits, Congressional inquiries, and international controversy and condemnation. This is after the release of a Hollywood film of that title, starring Jake Gyllenhaal, Meryl Streep, and Reese Witherspoon.

I was dumbstruck. Finally one hand went up, and the student sheepishly asked if rendition had anything to do with a version of a movie or a play.

I nodded charitably, then attempted to define the word in its more public context. I described specific accounts of U.S. abductions of foreign citizens, of the likely treatment accorded such prisoners when placed in the hands of countries like Syria and Egypt, of the months and years of detention. I spoke of the lack of formal charges, of some prisoners' eventual release and how their subsequent lawsuits against the U.S. government were stymied in the name of national security and secrecy.

The students were visibly disturbed. They expressed astonishment, then revulsion. They asked how such practices could go on.

I told them to look around the room at one another's faces; they were seated next to the answer. I suggested that they were, in part, the reason that rendition, waterboarding, Guantánamo detention, warrantless searches and intercepts, and a host of other such practices have not been more roundly discredited. I admit it was harsh.

[...]

Still, it is hard to reconcile the students' lack of knowledge with the notion that they are a part of the celebrated information age, creatures of the Internet who arguably have at their disposal more information than all the preceding generations combined. Despite their BlackBerrys, cellphones, and Wi-Fi, they are, in their own way, as isolated as the remote tribes of New Guinea. They disprove the notion that technology fosters engagement, that connectivity and community are synonymous. I despair to think that this is the generation brought up under the banner of "No Child Left Behind." What I see is the specter of an entire generation left behind and left out.

It is not easy to explain how we got into this sad state, or to separate symptoms from causes. Newspaper readership is in steep decline. My students simply do not read newspapers, online or otherwise, and many grew up in households that did not subscribe to a paper. Those who tune in to television "news" are subjected to a barrage of opinions from talking heads like CNN's demagogic Lou Dobbs and MSNBC's Chris Matthews and Fox's Bill O'Reilly and his dizzying "No Spin Zone." In today's journalistic world, opinion trumps fact (the former being cheaper to produce), and rank partisanship and virulent culture wars make the middle ground uninhabitable. Small wonder, then, that my students shrink from it.

Then, too, there is the explosion of citizen journalism. An army of average Joes, equipped with cellphones, laptops, and video cameras, has commandeered our news media. The mantra of "We want to hear from you!" is all the rage, from CNN to NPR; but, although invigorating and democratizing, it has failed to supplant the provision of essential facts, generating more heat than light. Many of my students can report on the latest travails of celebrities or the sexual follies of politicos, and can be forgiven for thinking that such matters dominate the news — they do. Even those students whose home pages open onto news sites have tailored them to parochial interests — sports, entertainment, weather — that are a pale substitute for the scope and sweep of a good front page or the PBS NewsHour With Jim Lehrer (which many students seem ready to pickle in formaldehyde).

I sympathize with professor Gup. As one of the teachers of the Introduction to Global Studies course here at Whittier, I have felt first hand this frustration with students' apparent ignorance of current events, and all too often their apathy. That said, I cannot completely agree. First of all, students today actually seem quite engaged in issues regarding the environment, they are far more anti-war than most students I can remember in the early 80's (or, said another way, they can see first hand some of lies and contradictions of our government), and students sense on some level that things are really changing, for better and/or worse, in the wake of globalization. (Note to self: There are people who study this. I should find out who and see if students are more engaged or less. Maybe those researchers even have a blog!)

Prof Gup's premise seems quite problematic to me as well. He is assuming that reading newspapers and watching CNN is the portal to being informed. I'm not so sure. The last century during which major newspapers and television channels dominated local markets did NOT lead our citizenry to become better citizens. Participation in our system of government was declining and a whole political party (Republicans) sought office for 40 years on the basis that government was in general a bad thing, that they should, to paraphrase Grover Norquist, "starve the beast." (Except for the military, of course). Political blogging and the internet have become a viable and informative way to engage in the political process, and that power is being courted by the big players--key evidence that, in spite of his "uninformed" students, something is afoot.

His premise also assumes that these major news factories are really informing the public. The record here is mixed too. Are people who watch Fox News more or less informed than someone who does not? Some interesting studies have shown that viewers of ol' Rupert's news outlet are somewhat likely to be ill-informed rather than well-informed. And CNN? What do Glenn Beck or Lou Dobbs inspire in their viewers other than fear and loathing? I'm sorry, Dr. Gup, you're letting these news outlets off far too easily and you are not considering the ground-breaking work done by Talking Points Memo or Media Matters (and any other number of groups). Do I need to bring up Judith Miller or the Washington Times (Go Moonies!!!)?

The information age will never be a panacea for the problems of our world until we accept that the media that we do have do not really represent us. Millionaire "reporters" and pundits by definition and constitution will not serve the public's interest well because they are simply too far removed from those concerns. The electoral process, as imperfect as it is, is still less forgiving than the clubby major newspapers and networks. I mean, the average income of the fictive families on television during the 50's was about 35K (adjusted for inflation). The average family in sitcoms now earns approximately 200k per year. I say this just for comparison's sake. Our media has become more elitist and less engaged with the public all while pandering more. I think that our mainstream media--those who bear the biggest responsibility for informing the public over the public airwaves and with their publicly chartered corporations--are much more to blame for the state of things than any other single thing. If we are going to begin casting blame, let's start with news corporations that have been thinking a lot more about their shareholders than about their public responsibilities. Indeed, we have decades of interesting data, so let's look there and let blogging reach its second decade before we start casting stones about technology.

But I will agree with Prof. Gup on this:

The noted American scholar Robert M. Hutchins said, decades ago: "The object of the educational system, taken as a whole, is not to produce hands for industry or to teach the young how to make a living. It is to produce responsible citizens." He warned that "the death of a democracy is not likely to be an assassination from ambush. It will be a slow extinction from apathy, indifference, and undernourishment." I fear he was right.

So do I. It's just that I fear that this apathy will come to us via our media outlets determined to tell us everything about Britney Spears and nothing (or something on A22) about that little thing called rendition.

It's not a conspiracy...

I don't really believe much in conspiracies. Sure, they exist. But most things like, say, the killing of Allende by Pinochet supporters with strong help from the CIA, or the promotion of Curveball within the U.S. "intelligence" network, are actually done in the open. To call them conspiracies would be to deflect attention from the very real power of social networks and the (in)human actions that take place thanks to hierarchical and peer systems.

That's why I found the following a fun read. Corporations, especially in the last 50 years, have gone viral. The belief system they promote (to the disadvantage of many struggling humans) has spread far and wide, infiltrating the deepest core of our beings.

Is the consumerist totalization of this country and the world really a conscious plot by a handful of powerful corporate and financial masters? If we answer "yes" we find ourselves trundled off toward the babbling ranks of the paranoid. Still though, it's easy enough to name those who would piss themselves with joy over the prospect of a One World corporate state, with billions of people begging to work for their 1,500 calories a day and an xBox chip in their necks. It's too bad our news media quit hunting with live ammo decades ago, leaving us with no one to track the activities and progress of what sure as hell seem to be global elites, judging from the financial spoor we find along every pathway of modern life.

In our saner moments we can also see that it does not take dark super-centralized plotting to pull off what appears to have been accomplished. Even without working in overt concert, a few thousands of dedicated individual corporate and financial interests can constitute a unified pathogenic whole, much the same as individual cells create a viable dominant colony of malignant organisms -- malignant simply by their anti-human, anti-societal nature. We don't see GM, Halliburton, Burger King and CitiBank lobbying the state for universal health or clean rivers, do we? But mention unions or living wages, and the financial colony within our national Petri dish shape shifts into a Gila monster and squirts venom on the idea and shits money all over Capitol Hill. I looked at all this as coincidence for years until the proposition finally strained credulity so much that I threw in the towel and said, "Fuck it. There is only so much coincidence to go around in this world. [Source: http://www.joebageant.com/joe/2006/12/somewhere_a_ban.html h/t: http://www.electricedge.com/greymatter/archives/00007254.htm]

NSTA: Teachers Owned by Corporations

Ah, thanks, National Science Teachers Association. I just got an email back from you about your refusal to distribute--for free--"An Inconvenient Truth." Here's what you said:

Dear Colleague:

Thank you for your recent e-mail expressing your opinion about the National Science Teacher Association’s decision in regard to the DVD “An Inconvenient Truth.” We value each and every comment we have received from our members and friends.

First and foremost, we want to ensure that you have the most current and accurate information about the issue. Ms. Laurie David, producer of AIT, asked NSTA to distribute 50,000 copies of the movie to its members. The NSTA Board of Directors stood by its 2001 NSTA policy prohibiting endorsements and decided not to mass distribute the DVD to members without their consent or request because it would constitute an endorsement.

As you will see in the letter that NSTA sent to Ms. David on Thursday, November 30, 2006 (http://www.nsta.org/main/pdfs/20061130LetterToLaurieDavid.pdf) we provided her with several options to publicize the availability of the DVD to both our members and the wider universe of science educators worldwide via our communication channels. We also invited Mr. Gore to participate at the NSTA National Conference in March.

This information and more is available on our website at www.nsta.org. We encourage you to read these documents.

Sincerely,



Linda Froschauer
President 2006-2007
National Science Teachers Association

Gerald Wheeler
Executive Director
National Science Teachers Association

It's really nice of you to write back, but you still don't explain why it would be an "endorsement" if you simply took the donation of the films. It doesn't explain how that "endorsement" would differ from your two full pages of corporate sponsors (pages 22-23 of your 2003 annual report). It doesn't explain why you take money from Exxon and Chevron, but you refuse a free donation from Laurie David. It doesn't explain how a physical or intellectual gift that you redistribute to your members is any different from monetary gifts you receive and redistribute to your members in the form of services for their membership.

I am not surprise by your letter however, given your board of corporate advisors:

Richard Schaar
Texas Instruments

Edwar Ahnert
Exxon Mobil Foundation

John Anderson
Toshiba America

Alfred R. Berkeley III
NASDAQ

George Borst
Toyota Financial Services

Mark Emmert
Louisiana State University

Stacy King
Clear Channel

Len Roberts
RadioShack Corp.

I have no doubt that Toyota and Exxon were thrilled to hear about Gore's movie, so it must have been your other friends that threw down the gauntlet. Let me just say that this makes you look bad. In fact, I'm tempted to call you whores.

Whores!

I'm also VERY impressed that NSTA has people from Clear Channel on its board. They produce so much serious scientific programming and are so well known for providing their clients with a docile and demographically defined audience to advertise to through their numerous outlets. They are also known for their liberal attitude toward freedom of thought and speech, those hallmarks of progress.

I'm disappointed that, in your letter, you are neither honest about one of the obvious reasons you refused Laurie David (you're afraid of losing your corporate sponsorship) nor do you admit that this is a loss for students who would have been better educated and better served by that documentary than by those produced by Exxon that are available for free to teachers.

Thanks. Thanks for nothing.

NSTA is morally bankrupt...

but getting richer all the time. From Orcinus:

Laurie David, one of the producers of An Inconvenient Truth, wrote a piece for today's Washington Post describing her efforts to make 50,000 DVD copies of that movie available to America's science teachers through NSTA.

They said no. And, more weirdly, they explained why. First, they said, they were afraid that if they started taking information from "special interests" like David, they'd have to take them from other groups, too. As though a private organization is obligated to accept and distribute any fool thing the Flat Earth Society may send them? As though they're not scientists, capable of sussing out the factual truth and relative educational value of any given piece of would-be curriculum? As though (as David points out) An Inconvenient Truth isn't already part of the required science curriculum in other countries, including Sweden and Norway?

That was bizarre enough, but then they got to their second reason: It might jeopardize their capital campaign. It turns out that NSTA gets millions each year from groups like Exxon-Mobil and the American Petroleum Institute -- who, in turn, are given access to American science classrooms to promote anti-global-warming propaganda with titles like "You Can't Be Cool Without Fuel." If they started telling kids the truth about global warming, they whined, that money might go away. And then how would that fine organization continue to support America's science teachers in their quest to instill their students with a passion for empirical truth, and teach the rigors of the scientific method to the country's next generation of technology leaders?

Memo to the Christian Coalition: The NSTA is for sale. For a mere million bucks a year, I'll bet you could get them on board with Intelligent Design, too.

Memo to parents: It might be time to find out if your kids' science teachers are members of this group, and have a word with them about it. If you -- or the teachers -- want to complain directly to the NSTA, the complaint form is here. They need to hear from everyone who still thinks that scientific truth shouldn't be auctioned off to the highest donor.