🖋️Feature: Why the biased media rhetoric against Remote Work is fuelled by the rich and powerful

Mainstream media coverage is biased to real estate interests in urban areas

👋 Welcome, welcome newbie readers and listeners!👋

🔥 Yearly Subscription = €40 for full access + archive 🔥

🙏 Special thanks to paid subscribers, YOU make this possible 🙏

My flabber is increasingly gasted (flabbergasted) in recent times

As a Remote Work advocate, I have found the last few months frustrating

In 2016, when I founded RoRemote - to focus solely on Remote Work Services

I was an outlier, one of the early adopters

Some may say a “pioneer”

Based in Northern Spain, moving there to help support our daughter’s help

Happily remotely working from where we picked and exploring Spain

But, then, the pandemic happened and (supposedly) after which - we now have wide spread adoption of Remote Work

Now in 2023, we seem to be peddling backwards

Or so, certain media reporting WANTS US to believe

Needs us to believe - to satisfy and placate their vested interests

Full disclosure, I got this message below via DM on Linkedin

I get messages like this often, but this one made real sense to me

Particularly, the way it broke it all down into four clear points

Title: The Reasons Remote Work Is NOT working

Naturally that caught my attention…

1. Corporations have expensive skyscrapers that lose value if nobody is in the office.

2. Corporations get tax benefits for owning said skyscrapers and having them full of employees

3. Cities have infrastructure such as roads, highways, gas stations, metro systems and other public transit.

During Covid, all of these lost huge profit. Companies usually make a ton of money off people commuting and sitting in traffic. That needs to be recouped.

4. Keeping every human contained in big cities and urban areas increases real estate value and taxes in those cities.

This makes life more unaffordable for everyone except for the few who make money off it, those with clear urban-centric vested interests

Reading those 4 points above again (and again), got me thinking

Not only does it explain clearly why mainstream media is against remote work

📗Check out: Ro’s Ramble Radio and How to never overpack again

So that we only hear:

• Reporting that is biased to real estate interests and therefore RTO mandates

• Read writing that is covering stories validating the return to urban areas

• Explaining why larger media brands need the coverage to stay urban-centric

Limiting the stories about:

• Remote-first companies, their achievements, successes and acquisitions - like Atlassian acquiring Loom

• Rural areas and the positive impact of Remote Work (by me, plus an image of illustration below)

Rural Coworking Space in Oliete, Teruel, Spain

• Corporate Digital Nomads Policies best practice examples, like the example from the UK based SEO Media Agency Reboot - validating that yes, many corporates ARE adopting Nomad friendly policies and practices

Yup, there are some encouraging articles sneaking through

For example: Bansko: Bulgaria’s Unlikely Digital Nomad Hub, featured by BBC

Although, that was in the travel section, it is still evidence of positive impact

But in general, the headlines like:

“US work-from-home rates drop to lowest since pandemic”

with the (more important, however almost) hidden byline:

The latest Census data also underlines that employees’ demand for remote jobs is outpacing the number of companies offering them.

Get’s pushed down and deprioritised

📗Check out: Ro’s Ramble Radio and How to never overpack again

At least, the article’s first sentence is somewhat accurate:

The push by employers to get American workers back into the office appears to be working.

Yup, you want to sell us the idea that it is working

But let’s remind ourselves again of the why, the prejudice:

The push back is by corporations and employers (and those with related interests) that own expensive skyscrapers, who get tax benefits (for said skyscrapers), to keep the emphasis on those cites (where those skyscrapers are located) and ensuring people are commuting and “contained” in those skyscrapers in and within those urban areas, meaning that ONLY a certain few people can benefit from that model, as those people own, control and reap the money generated in and within those urban-centric areas.

________________________

Unpacking that paragraph above, breaking it down, slowly yet surely

Reveals so many actors that are involved and affected

Actors whose economic interests combined, can influence - strongly

Swaying and ensure media coverage keeps repeating “Remote Work” is broken

Those smoking cigars ivory towers of skyscrapers or more likely sat in private jets

Working remotely themselves, yet denying others access

They want people back to those fixed offices in skyscrapers

To ONLY line their own pockets and protect their own interests

So they, fabricate and plot with fake reasons to justify their mandates

Quoting reasons like issues with culture, collaboration and camaraderie

I call, NON-sense

But if does make MONEY-sense, for them and them only

What do you think? Please comment below

Safe and sustainable nomading,

love n light,

💚 Ro

📗Check out: Ro’s Ramble Radio and How to never overpack again

🔥Yearly Subscription = €40 for full access + archive 🔥

🇪🇸 Meet Ro in Sevilla with Vivel Network - use: ROWENA20 for 20% off 🇪🇸

Subscriber gifts: 🎁 Tons of RoRemote freebies 🎁 FREE Linkedin learning courses 🎁

🌱 Follow me for Substack Notes, Linkedin & Twitter