Testing … testing … is this thing still on?

It’s been a while. Career track, life tract, shiny objects: I’m easily distracted. But I still enjoy a good rant and stumbled across one on a return flight from Detroit. I plunked down $1 for a New York Times to occupy me. It was the Tuesday, Jan. 16, edition. On C5, there was a rhetorical column on advertising from Stuart Elliot. It featured 20 questions to ask about advertising, the media and popular culture. One caught my eye:

“Who will be the first marketer to buy advertising space being sold by the Transportation Security Administration inside the plastic bins used by passengers at X-ray machines at airport checkpoints …?”

What?! I tried to picture the scenario under which this policy grabbed approval. TSA decision makers sit around a conference table. The question on their minds: “How can we boost revenue so we have more money to keep Americans safe?” Advertising beckons as a natural solution.

Turn to my mind, and what’s the question? It’s the corollary: Why does our TSA resort to seeking private funds? Is it not, despite our lawmakers’ assurances and reassurances, getting adequate funds? If that’s the case, then we need to discuss fully funding the vanguard between us and air disasters.

But I don’t think the solution lies in the government being in the business of selling ad space. Advertising already stretches our attention spans like elastic straps. The relentless pushes and pulls come more than daily - from the TV, the Web, the mailbox (electronic and otherwise). Should we also starve the TSA, like the USPS, so that service from the government must by sponsored by ads for credit cards or the latest wonder drug?