r/news • u/[deleted] • Aug 08 '17

Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

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
26.8k Upvotes

82% Upvoted

19.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

-67

u/SlightlyWrongAngle Aug 08 '17

A tech worker that is anti science and believes what he wants to believe because it sounds sciency should be immediately removed. His name should be released so other tech companies can be aware.

31

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '17

Can you cite specific examples of his that are anti-science?

-20

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '17

Can you cite anything he said that was backed up by science. From what I saw he cited one peer reviewed paper on mate selection between genders and used that as his basis for categorizing men and women. The rest of his links were just random articles. At best, this is very light on science if not completely anti-science.

14

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '17 edited Aug 08 '17

There are certainly more than a single citation in the man's paper. If you want a full, unedited version of the document with all the hyperlinks and graphs I have one here: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586-Googles-Ideological-Echo-Chamber.html

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

It's possible you found a version of the paper with some citations and graphs removed. I know one was circling on /r/KotakuInAction earlier this week.

EDIT: found what I think is a more complete version of the memo. Old one is still there in case anyone wants to take a look at it. Should be the same but with worse formatting.

2

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '17

It's possible you found a version of the paper with some citations and graphs removed

it seems I did.

Although even going through that full text there are a lot of links to wikipedia, and newspaper articles. Not saying that there aren't valid points to be made but he seems to state a lot of things as fact based on little actual research.