Streaming
television channels these days are increasingly
inserting advertising into their paid subscriber
content. Thus, I recently found myself sitting
through several commercials that struck me as
emblematic of how out of touch corporate
marketers are with the economic struggles of
ordinary Americans.
A
company offering cash advances to low-wage
workers makes light of people’s financial
difficulties. Take
this ad, where
a man buying groceries finds himself in the
awkward position of having bought more food than
he can afford to pay for. A fellow shopper in
line points out that a simple app he could
download on his phone “gives you up to $250
instantly.” The man pulls out his phone and
instantly exclaims, “I got money!” and proceeds
to make his purchase. But he sets aside the
broccoli he had planned to buy with a wink and a
nod to the kid in line next to him, because who
likes broccoli anyway, right?
Not
only does the ad mislead
viewers about
how long it takes to actually open an account on
the app and have access to cash, but it
deceptively portrays the app as “giving” money
to a person in need when it’s money that he is
borrowing against his own wages. Moreover, he
will pay a monthly charge, or extra fees to
access the money earlier. And, if he cannot pay
it back in time, he will incur hefty interest
charges out of his forthcoming wages. The ad
also makes light of the plight of those who run
out of money to buy groceries, and may have
credit scores so low that they cannot get a
credit card.
A
food delivery service that pays a low base
wage but allows workers to keep tips touts
itself as a fun activity for those “looking
for something new to do,”—in case of boredom?
Other
ads I encountered were similar. A food delivery
service that pays a
low base wage but
allows workers to keep tips touts
itself as
a fun activity for those “looking for something
new to do,”—in case of boredom? The company has
ads showing workers happily dancing in their
cars or glamorously shaking their hair (think
shampoo ads) out of a scooter helmet, eager to
pick up restaurant orders and deliver them to
residences. They do this just to “keep things
interesting,” because what could be more
interesting than driving around all day to
deliver hot food? The average
pay is
about $19 an hour but does not include the cost
of fuel or car insurance, or account for income
taxes. And of course, health and retirement
benefits, as well as paid leave, are entirely
out of the question.
Subcontracting
companies that allow people to hire others to do
grunt work for them also portray themselves in a
similarly tantalizing manner. One company
recently came
under fire for a billboard ad showing
a white man who had a project “due ASAP,” but
was able to hire a smiling Black woman who would
“be on it before EOD.” The ad’s corporate
work-lingo gave a lighthearted veneer to what
was effectively an exploitative situation.
The
gig economy, which promises flexibility
and autonomy,
has always been touted as beneficial for
workers. What often remains unsaid is everything
workers lose in exchange: job security, reliable
hours, health and retirement benefits, paid sick
leave or vacation, promotion opportunities, and
meaningful work. Companies based on the gig
economy model command an army of part-time
workers competing with each other for crumbs.
The
seductive marketing that these companies employ
has us laughing along at our own misfortunes.
They want us to be grateful to live in a digital
age where smartphones can turn our daily grind
into uncertain wages that are a fraction of what
our predecessors got as we smile through the
pain of having no healthcare.
The pressure of the
gig economy has
infected the entire
economic system.
“Flexibility” is
doublespeak for
uncertainty. The
“perk” of keeping 100
percent of all tips
received is a
euphemism for
downward spiraling
wages. The “freedom”
of driving one’s
own car as an
integral part of the job
hides the high cost
of gig work.
Despite
the relentlessly happy face painted over our
exploitative economy, many Americans aren’t
falling for it.
A
study by researchers at the American Academy of
Arts and Sciences found deep dissatisfaction
with the current system. The researchers, in
a guest
op-ed for the New York Times,
found that most people see “greed” as the
driving force of the economy, and they “believe
the rich and powerful have designed the economy
to benefit themselves and have left others with
too little or with nothing at all.”
They
point out that “[s]tress is a rampant part of
American life, much of it caused by financial
insecurity.” But corporate ads routinely portray
financial insecurity as a fun experience and
Americans as willing and enthusiastic
participants in a system designed to impoverish
them.
Not
only are the ads entirely out of step with what
Americans face, but the indicators that economists, news
media,
and politicians use
to measure the health of the national economy,
are also deeply out of touch with reality.
This
disconnect between capitalism’s reputation as an
efficient economic system rewarding hard work
and innovation and its reality as a system of
mass impoverishment is endemic to our culture.
At its heart, it is a system rooted in
individual well-being, a seductive idea that
appeals to the very human need to take sole
credit for our achievements and feel shame when
we fall through the cracks.
The
modern American economy preys on our belief in
this ideal. When we can’t afford to pay for
groceries it’s our fault. If we can’t pay back
the cash advance, we are to blame. Those who
don’t grin with joy while delivering takeout are
the ungrateful ones.
And
if the economy is “booming,” the persistent
feeling of collective malaise seems jarring.
“Americans remain gloomy about the U.S. economy,
even as GDP continues to expand and unemployment
is at a five-decade low,” writes a CBS.com
economic reporter.
That’s because Americans are still struggling to
pay off debts, keep up with bills, or afford
housing. Have they all failed themselves, or has
the economy failed them?
I fantasize about
ads centered on
economic narratives
rooted in collective
well-being: A man
paying groceries with
ease and showing off
his union card in
his wallet to those
in line behind him. A
woman who hops on a
comfortable,
reliable, and free
public bus to a well-
paying job at the
same time every day
because her hours
are stable and she
never has to pay for
gas because her
taxes cover the bus
that she and her
fellow workers use
every day.
Such
ideals are hardly radical and are based on
liberation from the capitalist grind: unions
even the playing field between bosses and
workers, while publicly funded goods and
services benefit us all.
If
we think of the glorification of exploitative
work as corporate propaganda, we can direct our
anger over it into realizing the very real, and
not-so-radical alternatives.
This commentary was produced
by Economy
for All, a project of the
Independent Media
Institute.
|
