Thoughts on NY Times article on ad agencies

The New York Times came up with routine, obligatory, advocacy piece that screams about gender gap in advertising agency. I though it about time they would come up with a new piece on gender gap; I guess there has to be at least one per day or so, maybe there even would be a quota on this, which, if not achieved, could also constitute discrimination against women. Never mind that these days a majority of advertisements are targeted to women, be it consumer goods or anything, gender feminists who sit in the office of the Times are not satisfied with the fact that gender ratio at the executive level are not equal between men and women. And of course, the insufficient number of female execs to satisfy the feminist statisticians brings up the same reasons for the so-called discrimination; sexism in industry, and the lack of role model and women-friendly workplace. Of course the future female leaders with high education who would supposedly compete in the tough world of ad business first need a role model so that they would feel, I guess, to use feminist's favorite words, safe to enter the business and feel accepted and encouraged to pursue the career. In addition, as usual, it provides every conceivable methods of bean-counting, including a raw number of female execs, a ratio at senor level, a ratio at this and that level and this and that field to prove how women are discriminated against. Of course the writer does not forget to put some feel-good paragraphs about women's achievement and progress made to satisfy herself as she wrote the piece and the like-minded readers who have extremely heightened sensitivity (doctors call it paranoia) who crave for this kind of article in the Times. It is also chilling to note that a concept of gender quota is permeating to every corner of the society, including, ridiculously, at the judge positions in an advertising festival, to ensure that those affirmative action female judges can check the gender of the ad creator first and judge accordingly. After all the rantings about the low representation of women in high jobs, no one seems to care about other number about 80% of purchasing decision are made by women - or in other words, only about 20% of such decision are made by men why there is no call for more government-funded programme, education, workshops and campaigns to level the number?

So the Angela Merkel officially became a new leader of Germany. Major news media (BBC, New York Times) seizes this opportunity to emphasize the "first female" part of this event and with such strong action words as "takes charge", a poitically correct image for women. Merkel was able to survive the election debacle because she is a darling of western news media..OK, she may not be a gender-feminist type but at least she IS a woman. Expect many advocacy pieces being churned out by major news media in coming days. (in the tune of.. OK, there is a female leader in Germany, why not in the United States of A............or in a more subtle and curcuitous manner, such as perception of Americans towards female top leader is changing... ?)