Commercial influence on college campuses

Commercialization of universities certainly has outcomes. Most of these outcomes are beneficial not only to the college but also to the students and the community at large.

Jennifer L. Croissant in her article "Can This Campus Be Bought? Commercial Influence in Unfamiliar Places" reviews the ongoing commercialization of college campuses. She critically analyzes the impact of commercialization on students, philanthropy and the relationship between the vendor and university education.

While discussing the impact of commercialization on students she argues on the notion that students are being greatly influenced by brands and they are unable to make sound decisions on their own. She fundamentally argues, "Students are developing their identities, and that includes brand and lifestyle identities as well as the disciplinary and occupational identities that are the focus of faculty work. The larger problem is that these commercial relationships seem so natural to us now that it is difficult even to articulate grounds for critical thinking about corporate ties."

From this statement it is clear that she assumes that college students somehow are unable to make a decision whether to buy, for instance, Pepsi or Nike. While one can make the case against their intrusiveness, however, by the age of 18 every one ought to be able to make a decision by themselves whether it is a healthy to drink Coke; or make a generally mindful choice to purchase Nike shoes. It is important to note that while the college students are young, they are nonetheless educated and experienced enough to make decisions, which benefit them.

While reviewing the impact of commercialization of college campus on philanthropy, she argues on the notion that philanthropy has become just another tool of advertising for the corporate giants. This is evident when she writes, "As student life becomes increasingly commercialized, so, too, does the pattern of outside gifts to the university. The distinction between philanthropy and advertising, or philanthropy and research contracts, seems to be eroding. Corporations are not in the business of philanthropy for its own sake. Activities such as corporate-sponsored endowed chairs must produce economic benefits for their sponsors, even if the benefits are largely intangible. Philanthropy confers a kind of legitimacy on the donor, and it provides resources and the aura of being worthy of gifts to the recipient."

It is important to note here that in democracy the ultimate benefactor of any endeavor ought to be the general public. While philanthropy does offer benefits to the firm, it also helps the university, the students and the community at large in several ways. Every university's economic situation and priorities varies. While some universities can self-sponsor their activities, most universities do need external assistance. Therefore, it is unbeneficial to criticize the presence of a socially responsible company on campus, which is benefiting education.

Regarding the vendor relationship, she centers her argument on the notion that tech-firms are greatly influencing the curriculum and thus negatively influencing college education. She writes, "Faculty members are very much involved in helping to select software packages for students or in setting the parameters for hardware purchases for their units, most faculty are clueless about such processes. These decisions are frequently based on the expectations that future employers have for graduates: Can a future project manager use Excel? Can an engineering student solve modeling equations with Matlab? Do the architecture students know AutoCAD? Are your students facile in some discipline-specific modeling software? Where have all the Apples gone?"

She argues that development is hurting diversity and open-mindedness. However, she overlooks the fact that government funds for universities had been on the decline since World War 2. This leaves universities exposed to the requirement for other funding sources. Corporate sponsorship and philanthropy are perhaps the only source left for the universities. Also the prehistoric notion of time-consuming and introspective attainment of education, understanding and skill has been swept away by the trend of market-pressures. At present, the slogans comprise of productivity, effectiveness, and profits- downgrading the education-obtainment immensely. Universities have got to step up and respond to these pressures otherwise America will be left behind their counterparts, such as, Japan, Germany and China etc.