Politics & Policy

GE’s Attempt to Champion Progressivism Is Creepy and Condescending

A young woman waits to see Mildred Dresselhaus in GE’s ad (image via YouTube)
Still, the Left will call it ‘corporate responsibility.’

Let me just say this at the outset: Mildred Dresselhaus, who died in February at the age of 86, was an amazing woman. An accomplished physicist who won just about every scientific award short of the Nobel Prize, Dresselhaus was by all accounts a pioneer, patriot, and great American.

Nonetheless, I still find GE’s commercial in her honor to be profoundly creepy.

If you haven’t seen the ad, which debuted at the Oscars and is omnipresent on MSNBC, here it is on YouTube.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=sQ6_fOX7ITQ

It opens with a little girl unwrapping her birthday present. “A Millie Dresselhaus doll!” she exclaims with glee. The camera then cuts to a video of the same scene on a Facebook page, with a proud parent captioning it “Found her a Millie Dresselhaus doll! #BestMomEver.” The doll shows the elderly Dresselhaus in her apparently trademark red sweater and black slacks.

The montage speeds up after that. Little girls are all dressed like Millie for Halloween. An ecstatic Indian TV host introduces Millie on her talk show. We see a maternity ward where all the little girls are named “Millie.” Then, a girl leaving her physics exam texts her friend. “Aced physics!!” she types, followed by two Dresselhaus emojis.

Finally, the narrator chimes in, during a scene with two young women snapping pictures of themselves posing in front of a giant mural of Dresselhaus, wearing a crown, on the side of a building. “What if we treated great female scientists like they were stars?” the narrator asks.

More scenes of young people freaking out over the octogenarian scientist unfold, including a young woman pointing to the Dresselhaus image on her T-shirt and saying, “Yasss, queen!”

The narrator goes on: “What if Millie Dresselhaus, the first woman to win the National Medal of Science in Engineering, were as famous as any celebrity?”

Paparazzi fight to snap a picture of her having lunch. Crowds fill public squares as people around the world flock to stadiums for her lecture. Glassy-eyed women wait in anticipation for her to walk on stage.

“What if we lived in a world like that?” the narrator asks.

Then the screen goes black. And in simple white text we learn that “GE is helping create that world.”

The commercial goes on to explain that GE wants to get more women interested in science and engineering, which is fine by me.

But the company, which depends heavily on government contracts, subsidies, and regulations, has a long history of tapping into trendy political fads and causes that just so happen to help its bottom line.

The most famous was GE’s “Green Week” propaganda campaign back when it owned NBC. GE ordered all of NBC’s shows — news, sitcoms, dramas, sports — to incorporate messages about the importance of fighting climate change and using renewable energy. Only rarely would anyone disclose that the corporate behemoth made billions of dollars selling products — light bulbs, wind turbines, greenhouse-gas credits — that wouldn’t be profitable without government subsidies and regulations.

The crowd that normally demonizes big business as evil and “right-wing” didn’t care. Neither did the usual media critics and decriers of conflicts of interest. Why? Because they agreed with the political agenda that GE was parasitically exploiting. When big businesses do what the Left likes, words like “greed,” “propaganda,” “crony capitalism,” “corruption,” etc., never come to mind. They call it “corporate responsibility.”

It’s condescending because it makes it sound like the notion that women can be scientists and engineers is the stuff of science fiction or fantasy.

At the time I liked to ask, “What if Rupert Murdoch ordered all of Fox’s shows, including its prime-time sitcoms, to commit to ‘Pro-Life Week’? What would be the response then?” To my mind, that would have been better than Green Week, because at least Murdoch has no financial interest in federal abortion policy.

I have no idea what, if any, profit motive informs the Dresselhaus ad other than the desire for GE to be seen as a loyally progressive company and to get on the good side of various regulators, bureaucrats, and feminist groups.

But it’s still creepy and awfully condescending. It’s creepy because any society based on deranged cults of personality is scary and weird. Making science itself into some kind of fanatical faith is almost a dystopian cliché.

It’s condescending because it makes it sound like the notion that women can be scientists and engineers is the stuff of science fiction or fantasy. If GE did the same kind of ad, only imagining a world where black people could be scientists, I suspect that would be more obvious.

READ MORE:

You Gotta Lie: The Tangled Progressive Web

Trump the Progressive: The Managers vs. The Markets

Backward-Looking ‘Progressives’: Pursuing Equality by Denying Reality

Most Popular

White House

The Impeachment Clock

Adam Schiff’s impeachment inquiry is incoherent. Given the impossibility of a senatorial conviction, the only strategy is to taint the president with the brand of impeachment and weaken him in the 2020 election. Yet Schiff seems to have no sense that the worm has already turned. Far from tormenting Trump and ... Read More
White House

The Impeachment Clock

Adam Schiff’s impeachment inquiry is incoherent. Given the impossibility of a senatorial conviction, the only strategy is to taint the president with the brand of impeachment and weaken him in the 2020 election. Yet Schiff seems to have no sense that the worm has already turned. Far from tormenting Trump and ... Read More
Elections

Warren’s Wealth Tax Is Unethical

Senator Warren would impose a 2 percent annual tax on wealth above $50 million, and a 6 percent annual tax on wealth above $1 billion. These numbers may seem small, but remember that they would be applied every year. With wealth taxes, small numbers have large effects. Applied to an asset yielding a steady ... Read More
Elections

Warren’s Wealth Tax Is Unethical

Senator Warren would impose a 2 percent annual tax on wealth above $50 million, and a 6 percent annual tax on wealth above $1 billion. These numbers may seem small, but remember that they would be applied every year. With wealth taxes, small numbers have large effects. Applied to an asset yielding a steady ... Read More
Immigration

The ‘Welfare Magnet’ for Immigrants

That term refers to a controversial concept -- and a salient one, given the Trump administration's efforts to make it harder for immigrants to use welfare in the U.S. A new study finds that there's something to it: Immigrants were more likely to come to Denmark when they could get more welfare there. From the ... Read More
Immigration

The ‘Welfare Magnet’ for Immigrants

That term refers to a controversial concept -- and a salient one, given the Trump administration's efforts to make it harder for immigrants to use welfare in the U.S. A new study finds that there's something to it: Immigrants were more likely to come to Denmark when they could get more welfare there. From the ... Read More
Economy & Business

Who Owns FedEx?

You may have seen (or heard on a podcast) that Fred Smith so vehemently objects to the New York Times report contending that FedEx paid nothing in federal taxes that he's challenged New York Times publisher A. G. Sulzberger to a public debate and pointed out that "the New York Times paid zero federal income tax ... Read More
Economy & Business

Who Owns FedEx?

You may have seen (or heard on a podcast) that Fred Smith so vehemently objects to the New York Times report contending that FedEx paid nothing in federal taxes that he's challenged New York Times publisher A. G. Sulzberger to a public debate and pointed out that "the New York Times paid zero federal income tax ... Read More