There is never unanimity in opinion. If there was, the commercial would never have been able to be made, as the people in the ad would all agree with each other.
Parker Malloy in Upworthy, calls it “Surprisingly great.” Joe Berkowitz in Fast Company, in calling it “The Antidote to the Pepsi ad, “ wrote:
“…. [E]ncouraging actual dialogue is a thousand times more of a mature and responsible way to address our current international predicament than glamorizing, fetishizing, and whitewashing the protest movement.”
And they are both correct.
Didi Delgado, here in Medium, on the other hand, not only calls it “Worse than the Pepsi ad,” but is so self-righteous and condescending that the only reason she can come up with on why anyone could possibly disagree with her is that we are “too stupid” to realize that she is right and we are wrong.
Thus, she insults her audience, and I do not pay attention to anyone stupid enough to think that calling me stupid is going to influence me to change my mind (it is, after all, what caused Hamilton to punch the bursar).
The brilliance of the piece is in the humanizing of “the Other.” Delgado prefers to demonize “the Other.”
What Ms. Delgado does not appear to understand is that when you judge people (i.e., call them “too stupid to understand”) you prevent and preclude any possibility of influencing the person you judge — or to appreciate their talents. Delgado, ironically, is engaging in precisely the arrogant, one-dimensional labeling and judging of the “Other” to which this bar-building exercise is an antidote. But SHE might not be smart enough (too stupid?) to realize this.
The solution? Get Parker Malloy and DidI Delgado into a warehouse together to figure out how to build a bar.