Elon Musk channels Office Space with email to federal workers ('What would you say you do here?')
Elon Musk just gave the entire federal workforce an ultimatum: Tell me what you did last week. If you don't respond, resignation accepted.
You're viewing a single thread.
Office Space parodied these feckless "efficiency consultants" but of course neither Musk nor this fluff piece writer see the irony.
I guess the world has become so stupid, satire couldn't survive.
... neither Musk nor this fluff piece writer see the irony.
I think you missed a lot of the tone of the article if you think the writer was in favor of Musk's actions.
I mean, it's open to interpretation, but the reason I said that is because the author uncritically accepts a lot of Musk's and Trump's premises which legitimizes Musk's actions, while consistently avoiding any clear criticism.
E.g.:
Musk, the self-appointed Trumpian king of government efficiency, is also not only taking a hardline approach to trimming the federal bureaucracy.
Frames that Musk actually is seeking to "trim the federal bureaucracy" in the author's voice.
Of course, this all aligns perfectly with President Trump’s broader goal of cutting government spending, with Trump even suggesting that Musk should get more aggressive. That’s right — Musk’s plan to weed out slackers thus far somehow hasn’t been “extremely hardcore” enough for the president. So, in classic Musk fashion, he’s gone all-in, demanding rigorous reporting, cutting contracts, and looking to save a cool $1 trillion along the way.
Bold mine. This paragraph together has a lot of tells. The phrase "weed out slackers" implies there are real "slackers" that Musk is fairly "weeding out."
Musk's "demanding rigorous reporting" also legitimizes and normalizes Musk's harassment of these employees. The author's use of "classic Musk fashion" with this legitimized language implies the author also has a positive opinion of Musk.
"Looking to save a cool $1 trillion" is breezy casual language that could be argued to restate Musk's goal, but use of "save" is a positive connotation word, and subtly implies waste. "A cool" before money is meant to make the number more impressive.
Meanwhile, over at DOGE (the acronym for the Department of Government Efficiency), employees are reportedly working 120-hour weeks and sleeping in pods to keep up with the billionaire’s demands. Will this lead to a leaner, meaner federal workforce, or just mass resignations and bureaucratic chaos? Either way, I think we all know how Musk would answer his own What would you say you do here? question: He led the DOGE team in hacking through the federal government like a caffeine-fueled lumberjack at a piñata party.
The closing paragraph is meant to look neutral but again, this seems to lionize DOGE by making them look like hard workers (no need to verify or be skeptical of the 120 hour claim?), and frame it as Musk having a killer response to the Office Space question.
Read the article through the lens of a MAGA and maybe that will convey it better - this seems like hype, loosely coded for mainstream.
Same quotes with emphasis changed:
Musk, the self-appointed Trumpian king of government efficiency, is also not only taking a hardline approach to trimming the federal bureaucracy.
Of course, this all aligns perfectly with President Trump’s broader goal of cutting government spending, with Trump even suggesting that Musk should get more aggressive. That’s right — Musk’s plan to weed out slackers thus far somehow hasn’t been “extremely hardcore” enough for the president. So, in classic Musk fashion, he’s gone all-in, demanding rigorous reporting, cutting contracts, and looking to save a cool $1 trillion along the way.
Meanwhile, over at DOGE (the acronym for the Department of Government Efficiency), employees are reportedly working 120-hour weeks and sleeping in pods to keep up with the billionaire’s demands. Will this lead to a leaner, meaner federal workforce, or just mass resignations and bureaucratic chaos? Either way, I think we all know how Musk would answer his own What would you say you do here? question: He led the DOGE team in hacking through the federal government like a caffeine-fueled lumberjack at a piñata party.
I'm sure you intend this to highlight the alternative reading of the article, but just being frank and no offense, I actually don't see the difference. Most of the things you highlighted are things I explained why they are implicitly actually legitimizing Musk and his actions, some seem random, and none of them contradicts my theory.
But yes, there's are competing ways to interpret this. That's why I call it a "fluff piece" rather than a outright authoritarian sycophancy.