...with the charming title "Screw You, GM." It's subtitled "After decades of treating its workers miserably, GM got exactly what it deserved." Is he serious? GM workers were treated incredibly well. So well, in fact, that it led almost directly to the failure of the company. He goes on to say that many of those that lost their jobs in recent years "ended up working two jobs for half the pay they were getting at GM." Sounds to me like they were overpaid before.
Moore gushes about the President of the United States firing the CEO of the "wealthiest and most powerful corporation of the 20th century." He claims that "this bold move has sent the heads of corporate America spinning and spewing pea soup. Obama has issued this edict: The government of, by, and for the people is in charge here, not big business." Well, not exactly. In fact, if you don't go to the federal government with your hat in your hand asking for money you're probably okay. My guess is that Obama doesn't want to own GM any more than anyone else. They're an albatross and only life-long residents of Michigan like Moore haven't figured that out.
I'm not a big fan of Moore's, in case you can't tell. I've seen a few of his movies and I've decided that he's either dishonest or just plain nuts. None other than John McCain called him a "disingenuous film-maker" in that annoying high-pitched voice of his at the Republican convention in 2004. I don't recall if he prefaced that remark with his creepy verbal tic "my friends" but I remember agreeing with him. You know it's bad when you're quoting John McCain. And while I'm trashing him, Moore is also a bit of a hypocrite (as are we all). I couldn't help noticing in his piece that when he was a struggling artist "the assistant manager at the movie theater would sneak me in so I could watch an occasional movie." He doesn't say, but I assume this means he didn't pay. That's stealing. Moore would pillory anyone else who did that.
He concludes the piece by saying that he wondered what his old friends and neighbors "must have all thought when they woke up this Monday morning to read in the Detroit News or the Detroit Free Press the headlines that Obama had fired the CEO of GM. Oh, wait a minute. They couldn't read that. There was no Free Press or News. Monday was the day that both papers ended home delivery. It was canceled (as it will be for four days every week) because the daily newspapers, like General Motors, like Detroit, are broke." And why is that? Because they can't compete with the Internet and with Web sites like The Daily Beast, where Moore chose to publish this article.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
While Michael Moore puts such a heavy spin on his arguments that it is hard to take him seriously, I am glad he is out there.
First of all, he is by no means the first person to twist the facts to his theory (I always get a chuckle from remembering that Fox News' modo is "Fair and Balanced").
Second of all, I feel like his topics (Corporate greed, America's culture of violence, the Bush Administration's baffling response to 911) are ones that do not make it into the main stream media much of the time.
Just because Moore exaggerates these issues does not mean they do not exist and should not be addressed. I think the situation with the autoworkers is a good example.
Even though Moore might overstate his case, I get a little suspicious when the automaker executives pull their "poor me" act about how it is providing for employee health care that brought down the American auto industry. To me, that's the definition of a hard sell. How about investing in an R&D team to make cars that can compete on quality and not just play on sentiment?
Just as Moore caricatures big, bad executives, so too do executives seem to make themselves out as victims of those with less and upon whose physical labor they derive their fortunes in part.
I guess I'm trying to say that things are complicated and everyone distorts the truth for their own benefit. Still, it seems like those lacking power and influence have a harder time getting their distorted version of the truth out there, while the rich can kick back with fine cigars and whiskey while their PR teams go to work.
Moore, as problematic as his arguments may be, is giving a voice to those who often don't get a say. For that reason, I think his work is worthwhile. After all, there is always the option to not watch him or disagree with his views.
Kind of like some crackpot blogger in the northern suburbs, eh?
Post a Comment