[1] On the other hand, there are those who believe that schools should remain advertisement-free, emphasizing concerns about potential commercial influence on students or the distraction it may pose to the learning environment.
However, many of these laws prohibit ads for political speech, tobacco, alcohol, gambling, drugs, or material of sexual nature.
[3] In certain districts, free cell phones are offered to students who receive text messages from companies promoting academic success.
Some states have implemented these courses into their graduation requirements to meet the demand, but most boards of education stop short of directly immersing an entire school community into these topics by deregulating their advertising policies.
Proponents also argue that children must be educated and seasoned as interpreters of marketing strategies from a young age so that they become discerning and conscious consumers as adults.
Today, due to cultural shifts, young children have less apparent authority to make purchases directly than they have in past decades, but there has been suggestion that parental supervision already serves as the only necessary check on the growing influence of any deliberate advertising in elementary schools.
This, in turn, lays the groundwork for a distorted understanding of the necessary, reciprocal-yet-falliable relationship that exists between state agencies and private companies.
Others have argued that some advertisements, particularly those which emphasize positive character development in children (healthy diet, mental health, etc.
Children under the age of 13 are a vulnerable population that lacks the executive functioning skills to comprehend what the advertisement is trying to sell and the techniques used to persuade and frame customer decisions.
This placed restrictions on what could be served in vending machines and sold on school grounds, with the exception of fundraisers (often candy bars or doughnuts) and after-school events.