Brett Clark, "General Electric's Ecomagination: New Veneer, Same Propaganda"

General Electric’s Ecomagination:
New Veneer, Same Propaganda
by Brett Clark

We Bring Good Things to Life

General Electric (GE) commercials have always aimed to present a calm, peaceful world that (they imply) the company's technological ingenuity helps make possible. After all, they "bring good things to life." As environmental degradation continues to expand in tandem with global capitalism, environmental consciousness becomes a new marketing strategy. GE's newest invention is to present itself as an environmental crusader. Singin' in the Rain

"Ecomagination" is its latest moniker, proclaiming that one of the world's largest corporations has gone green, embracing environmentally-friendly policies and promising to provide the world with solutions to environmental problems. All we have to do is trust the company and continue our lives, preferably as its customers, and it will bring us the clean, pure world shown in its advertisements.

GE prides itself on providing over 125 years of service to customers. Its mantra, following Thomas Edison, is that it "finds out what the world needs" and "proceeds to invent it." (Mind you, profits are simply a byproduct of its benevolence.) The mantra serves to paint it as a responsible company in the service of humanity. (Think of it as a gentle giant.) But if we strip away its public relations cloak, we gain a completely different picture of GE and what it brings to the world.

In Deadly Deception: General Electric, Nuclear Weapons & Our Environment, the 1991 Academy Award winner for Best Short Documentary, GE's true corporate legacy is revealed. Here is the corporation that made plutonium for the United States government; deliberately released radioactive materials into the air, creating a huge environmental disaster zone; and falsified asbestos exposure records in regards to their workers. Hanford, in Washington state, is an enormous nuclear facility that GE operated. Here, it knowingly released extensive amounts of radioactive materials into the water and air. In fact, in 1949, it conducted classified experiments which involved the intentional release of radioactive materials (500 times the radioactivity of Three Mile Island) into the air. At times, the region experienced higher doses of radioactivity than Chernobyl. The toxic legacy of GE left 27 of 28 families along the "death mile" with cancers or babies with birth defects (no eyes, no skull, etc.), farm animals grossly deformed, and the Columbia River as one of the most radioactive rivers in the world. The radioactive waste stored at Hanford continues to present grave concerns given the potential for leakage. Of course, GE's response to public concerns was to deny any significant environmental impact from its operations. At one of its plants in Knolles, New York, workers raised concerns about exposure to asbestos. Records were falsified; workers who agitated were fired. Any problems encountered, whether related to workers or the environment, were simply dismissed.

When confronted with criticism, GE pursued a massive public relations ad campaign, rather than advertising that it was constructing tools to destroy life. The public was bombarded by its life-affirming ads, which encouraged them to worship the technological marvels offered by the company. The ads were filled with reassuring statements of kindness, a paternalistic fantasy that represented GE as a helpful friend: "We'll be there"; and "Hand in hand, you and me, we are the threads in the invisible tapestry. GE -- part of everything we do." The ads were truthful -- just not in the way that GE wanted us to believe. GE's invisible poisons contaminate the world and accumulate in our bodies. GE has indeed became an intimate part of our lives.

Now, the corporation that has spread pollution around the world is engaged in a new PR campaign, presenting itself as an environmentally conscious business. GE's Web site promises to address "the problems of tomorrow, today," giving its customers "a more prosperous, cleaner future." Never one to let a platitude go unused, GE proclaims that the "most abundant renewable resource" is the imagination of people -- the resource GM uses to bring "ecomagination" to life. This new veneer is built for our times, as environmental problems escalate in scale. But it is still the same old corporate propaganda.

What is GE's solution to environmental problems? "We believe that better technology is the answer to our customers' environmental challenges" of supplying clean water, air, and energy. Once again, technology (in the service of capital) is offered as the messiah. GE is going to invest over a billion dollars in "greener technologies" within the next five years. Its objective is to improve its energy efficiency as a company (to reduce carbon emissions) and to expand its environmental products for the market, hoping to "double revenue from green machines from $10 billion in 2004 to $20 billion by 2010." Profit remains the focus of this company -- not a sustainable future, not meeting the needs of people.

Behind the façade of environmental consciousness and new "green" technologies remains the same corporation driven by the accumulation of capital. Its PR campaign is part of the ruling-class effort to pass off the environment as a problem to be solved by business ingenuity. In this sleight of hand, the role of capital in creating the ecological crisis is obfuscated. In fact, GE attempts to make the pursuit of profit and environmental sustainability seem like the same thing: "Ecomagination isn't just good for the environment, it's good for business, too." GE dreams of pursuing the ceaseless accumulation of capital forever without concern: "GE is uniquely suited to help solve environmental challenges profitably, today and for generations to come."

It should go without saying that we should not buy into GE's latest deception that it will help create a cleaner environment, that technology -- especially in the service of capital -- is the answer to environmental problems, and that the market can address ecological concerns. The future depends upon us, as historical agents, to transcend a system of production that necessitates the constant exploitation and degradation of people and the environment.

Brett Clark is a graduate student in sociology at the University of Oregon and co-author of "Ecological Imperialism: The Curse of Capitalism" (Socialist Register 2004).