Like hogs at the public trough. So predictable.
After the financial industry had its day suckling the government teat to the tune of more than $1 trillion, the U.S. auto industry determined it was the next piglet in line.
But to make a withdrawal from what seems like a blank public checkbook, GM, Ford, and Chrysler needed to start the gloom and doom drumbeat. GM wasted little time finding a set of drumsticks. Its latest full-page issue ad in the USA Today is titled: “We can’t afford to do without the U.S. Auto Industry. Here’s why.”
What follows is a thinly veiled, seemingly reasonable argument laced with rhetorical horror and circular logic.
Let’s examine, shall we.
Claim #1: 2.95 million people will lose their jobs.
Really? 2.95 million? That assumes all three companies (not simply GM) close their doors tomorrow. And let’s not just count those jobs; let’s include all jobs even casually related to auto sales, parts, and service. That’s just plain silly. Auto sales are down, but they are not zero. Additionally, many regulations at most all government levels mandate domestic vehicle purchases for public use. Not all. But most. This flimsy claim is designed to breed fear of a deep recession stemming from staggering job losses.
Claim #2: $21.1 billion in Social Security deposits will disappear.
Ooh, lest we forget retirees, GM’s ad pushes the “senior” button as well. This eight-word gem strikes fear in the heart of anyone receiving a regular check from the government. And it assumes all 2.95 million people in Claim #1 do nothing productive with their lives.
Claim #3: $24.7 billion in Income Tax will be lost.
Forget about universal health care. No money for new spending if we let the Big Three go down. Let’s see. What percentage of $2.9 trillion is $24.7 billion? Not so much in the grand scheme. But as long as we’re using big scary numbers . . .
Claim #4: $12 billion in Research and Development will never be realized.
Yes, the Big Three have done sooo much with their $25 billion government grant for research into fuel-efficient cars. I don’t remember Toyota needing $25 billion to build (what will soon be) three versions of the Prius.
Claim #5: 2 million American will go without health care.
Don’t forget to tug at the soccer mom’s (or is it “hockey mom’s” now?) heartstrings. About 47 million Americans don’t have health care now. That would translate into a four percent increase. Not good, of course, but four percent doesn’t sound as scary as two million, does it?
Claim #6: The development of biofuel, electric, and hydrogen technologies will suffer.
See Claim #4. Laughable. The Big Three are better at writing commercials that talk about alternative fuels than they are at actually shipping them to dealers. Need proof? If you’re headed to grandma’s house this holiday season, play the car counting game. Only this time, don’t count “red ones” or “blue ones,” count foreign hybrids and domestic hybrids. See who wins. (Hint: Don’t bet against the Japanese.)
Claim #7: 1 in 10 jobs (with an asterisk) at home rely on the U.S. auto industry.
You knew it was coming. This is as much an appeal to the general public as it is to the legislators the Big Three CEOs are trying to convince right now.
You could see all of these claims as slightly repetitive, but rhetorically, the ad is quite effective. GM is using a classic “fear” strategy. The ad has it all: Startling statistics, appeals to reason, appeals to emotion, and appeals to the public good. Ads like this one feed water cooler chatter all over the country. They provide sharp talking points to boosters. And even more vexing, the act of debunking an exaggerated claim repeats it. There is plenty of research to suggest that even when people understand an exposed logical fallacy, they still harbor emotional attachment—in this case, fear—from the original claim. It’s a key reason political attack ads work, even if they are proven false. To prove it’s not true, you must repeat it. Repetition is power.
However, conspicuously absent from the collective rhetoric from the auto industry is any reference to the 500-pound gorilla in the corner. GM is burning through cash to the tune of $4 to $5 billion per month. At that rate, even if they were to snag the entire $25 billion from Uncle Sam, the company could remain solvent only through Q1 2009. Does any reputable economist think the economy will be markedly better by April? Unlikely.
So it begs the question: Rather than treat the American public to another horror story, why don’t you help show us how you plan to build better cars? Cars that can compete with their German and Japanese counterparts? (Don’t believe me? GM finally had enough of local car peddler Denny Hecker selling Chevrolets and Hyundais in the same dealership. Why? Chevrolet underperformed. There’s no better wake-up call than that.)
Guys, if you want our money, we need a plan—a plan worthy of the $25 billion you’re asking for. We need a plan we can understand and believe in. We don’t need your version of Chicken Little.
Instead of fear, Big Three, talk to us about a hopeful plan for the future. It seems to me that a tall guy with a funny name just had quite the success on Election Day using that strategy. You could too.
Comments