CORPORATISM - LOOKING GLASS NEWS | |
National Parks to Seek Corporate Sponsorships |
|
from Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility
Entered into the database on Thursday, December 01st, 2005 @ 19:15:50 MST |
|
Corporate Funds Will Alter Park Landscapes and Sway Policies Washington, DC — In a quiet but far-reaching change, the National
Park Service is poised to adopt a new policy of aggressively seeking corporate
sponsorship of park projects and facilities. In return for financial sponsorships,
the plan will give corporate donors naming rights, use of National Park symbols
and personnel in advertising and much greater influence over park managers,
according to public comments filed today by Public Employees for Environmental
Responsibility (PEER). “This starts a slow motion commercialization of the national
park system,” stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch. “What will
be allowed stops just short of licensing ads for ‘The Official Beer of
Yosemite’ or ‘ Old Faithful, Brought to You by Viagara.’” The Park Service has put forward a draft directive encouraging active pursuit
of potential financial donors and repealing the agency’s current passive
posture of merely accepting donations. Public comment on the plan closes this
week. Interior Secretary Gale Norton has hailed the plan as an “exciting”
new approach for broadening the funding base for national parks. Park managers would be encouraged to offer packages that attract big
corporate donors, including – Liberalized naming rights for trails, benches, rooms and other facilities
(but not parks themselves), as well as display of logos and slogans on park
literature, computer screens, and plaques; Exclusive media advertising rights to the official NPS Arrowhead
symbol, the term “Proud Partner” of the National Park Service
and the use of uniformed park employees in ads; and Flexibility to negotiate customized recognition deals that “meet
the needs of individual donors.” The plan jettisons bans against accepting or soliciting donations from vendors,
concessionaires, permittees and others doing business with a park. Alcohol,
tobacco and even gambling companies would also be eligible park sponsors. The
only up-front review of major gifts would be a subjective “totality of
circumstances” test applied by top officials to determine whether the
donation is “appropriate.” The plan is designed so that private donations develop into a much more significant
factor in overall park budgets, as well as high-profile capital projects and
improvements. Currently, the Park Service raises an estimated $17 million from
outside sources each year. “Large corporate donations exert a not-so-subtle gravitational pull on
park managers who are increasingly dependent on these donors for their budgets,”
Ruch added, noting that PEER is already hearing from park employees who have
been transferred or reassigned to placate donors. “Influence peddling
will soon become a major recreational activity in our national parks.” |