How far should we let commercialism creep into our public schools?

“Today’s announcements are brought to you by ‘The Joy of Pepsi.'” (Cue Britney Spears over the intercom.)

OK, it’s not that bad – yet. But the Lawrence school district’s current consideration of approving large soft-drink contracts as a way to boost revenue raises the question: Where will we, as a society, draw the line on commercial support of public services?

You can’t blame the school district. It’s hurting financially. Even though Gov. Bill Graves gave K-12 schools a pass in the last round of budget cuts, officials still are scraping for about every bit of revenue they can find. But it’s a little disconcerting that a school board discussion on the matter Monday night seemed to completely bypass whether soft-drink contracts were appropriate and go directly to how the school district could negotiate the best deal.

The propriety of such contracts was debated at length a few years ago when Kansas University entered into a lucrative contract with Coca-Cola. Some faculty members argued against such commercialism, saying it opened a door that could endanger academic freedom and diminish KU’s prestige. As it turns out, prestige probably isn’t an issue, considering the number of other universities that have signed similar deals.

News also came recently that ads also are finding their way onto police cars, purchased by advertisers for law enforcement agencies. To some, the idea sounds outrageous, but to others, it seems like a nifty way to get free police cars.

It’s ironic that the Kansas Legislature repeatedly has rejected the idea of using state lottery proceeds to help fund public schools because they considered the source of money to be too unreliable and the available money would vary from year to year. State funding decisions have pushed school districts to seek other forms of revenue. Are advertising-related contracts more desirable than lottery funds?

School district officials are doing the right thing by taking a look at the soft-drink contracts and setting a districtwide approach to the matter. As a matter of appearances, perhaps it would be preferable to direct soft-drink money only to extracurricular activities, especially athletic events where many drinks are sold and consumed.

Maybe the soft-drink contracts are harmless, but they raise a question that people might like to consider now rather than after commercial logos start showing up on school stationery.