|
?:reviewBody
|
-
In February 2020, we received multiple inquiries from readers about remarks attributed to U.S. presidential candidate and former New York mayor Mike Bloomberg, in which the billionaire businessman appeared to say he could teach anybody to be a farmer, but that information technology required greater intelligence. On Feb. 16, Wisconsin Republican official Anna Kelly posted a 60-second clip of Bloomberg to Twitter, writing: Billionaire Bloomberg claims he 'could teach anybody to be a farmer,' even implying that farmers don't have the same level of 'skill set' or 'grey matter' as folks in tech jobs. So demeaning, elitist, and out-of-touch it's appalling. Her post was retweeted by Donald Trump Jr., son of President Donald Trump. The younger Trump added: Bloomberg wouldn’t last 3 seconds as a farmer... you can tell he really hates regular hardworking Americans. He will never fight for them because he couldn’t care less about them. In the clip, Bloomberg can be heard saying: I could teach anybody — even people in this room, no offense intended — to be a farmer. It's a [process]: you dig a hole, you put a seed in, you put dirt on top, add water, up comes the corn. Later, he contrasts the nature of that work with that of the information economy: [...] The information economy is fundamentally different because it's built around replacing people with technology and the skill sets that you have to learn are how to think and analyze, and that is a whole degree level different. You have to have to have a different skill set, you have to have a lot more gray matter. The 60-second clip, and Bloomberg's remarks, garnered widespread coverage and prompted an angry response from some right-leaning observers. In an interview with Fox News, South Dakota's Republican Gov. Kristi Noem accused Bloomberg of exhibiting pompous ignorance in his comments. The video footage contained in Kelly's Twitter post, and subsequently shared widely online, was authentic and not doctored. Although clearly it was cut from a much longer video, its removal from its original context did not substantively alter its tone or sense, nor deprive the viewer of context which might significantly change or impinge upon their understanding of Bloomberg's remarks. As such, the claim that Bloomberg had said he could teach anybody to be a farmer and that information technology work required more gray matter was accurate. The original video was recorded at the University of Oxford's Saïd Business School on Nov. 17, 2016. Bloomberg appeared there as part of the school's Distinguished Speaker Seminar Series. The full video can be viewed on YouTube, below. When he made his remarks about farming and technology, Bloomberg was responding to a question, placed by an audience member, about the role of business leaders in addressing or alleviating public perceptions of economic inequality, especially in the context of Trump's 2016 election victory, which had taken place only days earlier. The following is a complete transcript of that question, and Bloomberg's full response. The segment shown in the 60-second clip is in bold type: Despite the significant volume of words, Bloomberg's basic argument can reasonably be summarized as follows: Income inequality is not as chronic as it was in the past, but is still a significant problem. The primary cause for concern is educational inequality, and in particular the extent to which older people who previously worked in agriculture and in relatively low-skilled manual work can transition to participating in the information economy. As an illustration of his broader point, Bloomberg presented farming as a relatively straightforward endeavor which anybody could easily learn, and argued that, by contrast with farming and low-skilled manual labor (you put the piece of metal on the lathe, you turn the crank in the direction of the arrow), taking part in the information economy required greater intelligence (a lot more gray matter) and different skill sets (how to think and analyze). Knowing the broader context in which Bloomberg uttered those remarks certainly enhances one's understanding and appreciation of them, but it does not alter their meaning or significance — Bloomberg was not speaking ironically, for example, or taking on the persona of someone else, when he made the comments in question. As such, those who quoted him did so both accurately and fairly, and did not misrepresent the meaning of his words. Snopes invited Bloomberg's presidential campaign to provide any background, context or additional information which might alter a viewer's understanding of his remarks, and we also asked whether Bloomberg still stood by his comments and the manner in which he expressed his arguments during the Oxford speech. In a statement, a spokesperson said: Mike wasn’t talking about today’s farmers at all, and highlighted the fact that Bloomberg mentioned 3,000 years of the agrarian society. However, this claim does not comport with the fact that Bloomberg was clearly speaking in the present tense about farming and low-skilled industrial labor, and the present-day dilemma of how to provide a new skill set to those that are already out in the work force.
(en)
|
![[This page as RDF]](http://data.gesis.org/claimskg/static/rdf-icon.gif){kind=icon}