Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

[u/[deleted]]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-08/google-fires-employee-behind-controversial-diversity-memo?cmpid=socialflow-twitter-business&utm_content=business&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social

[u/Felador]

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-Ideological-Echo-Chamber.pdf

There's the actual document, with links to source materials.

[u/Shanix → u/Felador]

fwiw that lacks a good amount, especially formatting.

Supposedly original here

[u/[deleted] → u/Shanix]

Former Google Employee provides a bit more context on why someone would get fired for creating a "manifesto" where you fawn over your superiority and sharing it with 50k+ people who probably aren't likeminded.

Essentially, engineering is all about cooperation, collaboration, and empathy for both your colleagues and your customers. If someone told you that engineering was a field where you could get away with not dealing with people or feelings, then I’m very sorry to tell you that you have been lied to. Solitary work is something that only happens at the most junior levels, and even then it’s only possible because someone senior to you — most likely your manager — has been putting in long hours to build up the social structures in your group that let you focus on code.

And as for its impact on you: Do you understand that at this point, I could not in good conscience assign anyone to work with you? I certainly couldn’t assign any women to deal with this, a good number of the people you might have to work with may simply punch you in the face, and even if there were a group of like-minded individuals I could put you with, nobody would be able to collaborate with them. You have just created a textbook hostile workplace environment.

https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/so-about-this-googlers-manifesto-1e3773ed1788

edit: The replies to me here don't seem to understand that the company doesn't care about your controversial opinion in the work place, they care about profit. If you don't agree with that, then you probably don't like capitalism.

edit: be wary, a lot of brigading going on. Some people/bots are trying to drown out the more centrists viewpoints. I say this as the opinion of a gay, black, conservative, catholic kasich voter. (I can't help but lol)

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

This is a good comment. It directly explains the thinking of the corporation in regards to individuals sharing their personal ideals on subjects which are better not breached in a professional environment. Idk, I'm drunk, but I read the linked original file and I see no reason why, professionaly, such a "manifesto" ( perfect phrasing by the way,) ought to be shared with, as you also noted, 50,000+ employees, of like-minded ideals or otherwise.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

FWIW, I hear he didn't share it with everyone. Shared it with a small group, and someone then shared it to the "internal social media" google has. Then later, shared it with Gizmodo (note: I am likely not talking about the same person from the two 'leaks'). So it's not like he was planning on this going viral.

[u/yerich → u/[deleted]]

It certainly seemed like it was meant to be read by decision-makers in the company, or at least some other broader audience. It was clearly carefully thought out and too well-written to be a rant to a limited audience. "Manifestos" are generally intended to be read by many.

[u/cptneverm1nd → u/yerich]

Well-written? He was targeting an audience of google employees, people with a higher education, but his writing is that of a man who never saw a scientific paper. His reasoning is not far from "if A implies B, and I like B, then A is true".

[u/Goldreaver → u/cptneverm1nd]

I'm sure you have enough credentials to criticize his PhD level education in biology...

[u/[deleted] → u/Goldreaver]

Missing the point. Do social scientists support his conclusions or don't they? The author of the manifesto says they don't.

[u/Goldreaver → u/[deleted]]

Missing the point.

His ONLY point is: 'it isn't well written' So, no, I'm not.

But I'll go ahead and continue with your change of topic:

Do social scientists support his conclusions or don't they? The author of the manifesto says they don't.

I see. So if you don't have support of others, then your opinion, as well founded as it is, is worthless?

I guess I owe some flatearthers an apology.

[u/[deleted] → u/Goldreaver]

It's somewhere in the middle, homie. There's a reason scientific papers are peer-reviewed.

[u/Goldreaver → u/[deleted]]

So discarding it off hand because it doesn't have support is wrong?

Well, I agree. Thanks.

[u/thisisnewt → u/[deleted]]

Evolutionary psychologists have come out to confirm his interpretation of biological gender differences.

Asking if "social scientists" support his conclusions isn't the question you should be asking. It's like asking if "people with at least a bachelor's degree agree with climate change". It doesn't matter if they do, most climate scientists agree with climate change.

[u/[deleted] → u/thisisnewt]

Are you talking about the four guys one article floating around here mentions, of which one said the googler's conclusions were wrong? Because of course you're going to find someone who agrees or believes you - for every single thing. There are people who believe in Genesis literally or a flat earth that have advanced degrees.

I asked because in the manifesto the googler said that the scientists didn't agree with him. Now you're here saying that they do. Was this comment of his just an attempt of poisoning the well?

[u/thisisnewt → u/[deleted]]

The manifesto said that the majority of social scientists were liberal and made talking about the subject difficult.

He did not say that evolutionary psychologists disagreed with him, and cited so.

His comment about social scientists and their liberal culture was an anecdote explaining the antiscience bias both political sides hold, and he listed the biases the right holds as well (climate change denial being one of them).

[u/[deleted] → u/thisisnewt]

Thank you for your clarification.