Google Memo

[StLucieBengal]

Surprised to see no thread on this news. This has to hurt google since its business model is based off open thought and sharing of ideas. Couple this with them attacking conservative YouTube creators.... will this continue to polarize everyone?

http://www.dailywire.com/news/19413/googles-own-jerry-maguire-pens-10-page-manifesto-ben-shapiro

Quote:Google Employee Pens 10-Page Manifesto RIPPING 'Diversity' Initiatives. So They Threaten His Job.

August 7, 2017 58.5k views

NurPhoto/Getty Images
Over the weekend, a software engineer at Google issued a 10-page memo regarding Google’s attempts to subvert technological progress in favor of empty diversity quotas — and that memo went viral. Google quickly responded with a memo from its Orwellian Vice President of Diversity, Integrity & Governance, Danielle Brown, who explained that such thoughts were not worth distributing and ran counter to Google’s mission.

Of course.

The original memo, titled “Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber,” relied on social science data to make the point that a dearth of women in tech wasn’t reflective of large-scale discrimination, but of difference in career preference and capacity between men and women on average. Such wrongthink would not be tolerated at Google, the company quickly responded.

The memo itself is not sexist, nor does it promote sexism. Instead, it opens with this statement:

I value diversity and inclusion, am not denying that sexism exists, and don’t endorse using stereotypes. When addressing the gap in representation in the population, we need to look at population level differences in distributions. If we can’t have an honest discussion about this, then we can never truly solve the problem.

This is eminently correct, of course. But right and wrong don’t matter at Google — only political correct propaganda does. The memo-writer continues:

Google’s political bias has equated the freedom from offense with psychological safety, but shaming into silence is the antithesis of psychological safety.
This silencing has created an ideological echo chamber where some ideas are too sacred to be honestly discussed.
The lack of discussion fosters the most extreme and authoritarian elements of this ideology.
Extreme: all disparities in representation are due to oppression
Authoritarian: we should discriminate to correct for this oppression
Differences in distributions of traits between men and women may in part explain why we don’t have 50% representation of women in tech and leadership. Discrimination to reach equal representation is unfair, divisive, and bad for business.
All of this is again correct — it’s the general leftist take on the world, which attributes natural differences between the sexes to discrimination, and blames society at large for individual decisionmaking. While the author of the memo has been castigated as a rabid right-winger, the document itself states that both “right biases” and “left biases” are “necessary for a functioning society or, in this case, company.” The author states, “Google’s left bias has created a politically correct monoculture that maintains its hold by shaming dissenters into silence.”

The memo author points out several differences between men and women that impact Google’s wage gap and sex gap in employment: personality differences, men’s higher drive for status. The author even recommends movement toward part-time work as part of Google’s culture in order to keep more women in tech, adding, “we should be optimizing for Google—with Google’s diversity being a component of that.”

The memo also tears into race-specific and sex-specific programming and mentoring, diversity hires, and verging on illegal discrimination. The author suggests ending the company-wide attempt to castigate those who disagree as immoral, stop alienating conservatives, and confront the company’s leftist biases, as well as moving away from empathy as a core value, avoiding microaggressions sinkholes, and being open about science.

All of this is not just eminently reasonable, it’s obviously correct.

Naturally, Google exploded with rage. Here’s their Director of Groupthink:

I found that it advanced incorrect assumptions about gender. I’m not going to link to it here as it’s not a viewpoint that I or this company endorses, promotes or encourages.

Diversity and inclusion are a fundamental part of our values and the culture we continue to cultivate. We are unequivocal in our belief that diversity and inclusion are critical to our success as a company. ... Part of building an open, inclusive environment means fostering a culture in which those with alternative views, including different political views, feel safe sharing their opinions. But that discourse needs to work alongside the principles of equal employment found in our Code of Conduct, policies, and anti-discrimination laws.

Naturally, Google hides behind the law to support its own biases. Now we’re told by Google that those who disagree may be butting up against their “Code of Conduct, policies, and anti-discrimination laws.”

Perhaps this employee violated Google’s Code of Conduct. If so, that’s because Google is all of the things the memo author says it is. But if this memo were to violate anti-discrimination laws, those laws themselves would violate the First Amendment.

In any case, Google is just proving the memo author correct: at Google, the only thing that matters is upholding Leftism. Which, in the end, may lead to Google’s downfall as competitors refuse to engage in the delusional thinking that’s leading Google to expend resources on idiotic, misguided initiatives.

[*PhilHos*]

Yep. Nothing like showing how you value diversity by firing any employee that thinks differently than you.

[GMDino]

(08-10-2017, 04:51 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Yep. Nothing like showing how you value diversity by firing any employee that thinks differently than you.

[*PhilHos*]

(08-10-2017, 04:56 PM)GMDino Wrote:

[Belsnickel]

I didn't read the piece from the fake news source in the thread, but having read the memo and what happened, my thoughts are that I don't care. I don't agree with Google's decision, and I don't disagree entirely with the guy's memo. That being said, a company can do what it pleases like that.

[StLucieBengal]

(08-10-2017, 05:22 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I didn't read the piece from the fake news source in the thread, but having read the memo and what happened, my thoughts are that I don't care. I don't agree with Google's decision, and I don't disagree entirely with the guy's memo. That being said, a company can do what it pleases like that.

Hope you didn't read it from all the msm sources who purposely left out parts of the memo along with the graphs emphazing his points.

[Belsnickel]

(08-10-2017, 07:15 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Hope you didn't read it from all the msm sources who purposely left out parts of the memo along with the graphs emphazing his points.

Nope, read the whole thing. I am a bit more discerning with my news/media selection.

[StLucieBengal]

(08-10-2017, 07:24 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Nope, read the whole thing. I am a bit more discerning with my news/media selection.

From which source? There were several outlets who omitted his supporting data for his positions.

[Belsnickel]

(08-10-2017, 08:49 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: From which source? There were several outlets who omitted his supporting data for his positions.

It was a document dump of a pdf of the complete memo, it didn't come from any media outlet. I tend to look for primary sources for things like that.

[BmorePat87]

I didn't think a software engineer's thoughts on sociological and alleged biological issues were particularly important just because he worked for a major company and it sparked controversy.

With regards to his workplace complaints, I believe the silencing of oppositional view points is a legit complaint of someone whose ideology differs from their workplace's mission, but this is where you either accept it, get another job, or speak up knowing you may need to get another job.

Don't necessarily agree with his thoughts on diversity and discrimination.

All in all, don't really care what a software engineer thinks about sociology nor do I think someone getting fired for what they said is a big deal. I don't agree with it and I think Google would look bigger if they didn't fire him, but I've always held that employers have the right to fire someone who makes statements they believe hurt their brand.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(08-10-2017, 07:15 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Hope you didn't read it from all the msm sources who purposely left out parts of the memo along with the graphs emphazing his points.

Oh, ffs, your source didn't include the crap you're whining about other sources not including.

[StLucieBengal]

(08-11-2017, 12:33 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Oh, ffs, your source didn't include the crap you're whining about other sources not including.

My source included the response to the complaints of his Memo. I shouldn't have to post the memo, it's quite amazing I had to even make a thread on the matter. The guy brought up legit issues.

[StLucieBengal]

(08-10-2017, 10:31 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I didn't think a software engineer's thoughts on sociological and alleged biological issues were particularly important just because he worked for a major company and it sparked controversy.

With regards to his workplace complaints, I believe the silencing of oppositional view points is a legit complaint of someone whose ideology differs from their workplace's mission, but this is where you either accept it, get another job, or speak up knowing you may need to get another job.

Don't necessarily agree with his thoughts on diversity and discrimination.

All in all, don't really care what a software engineer thinks about sociology nor do I think someone getting fired for what they said is a big deal. I don't agree with it and I think Google would look bigger if they didn't fire him, but I've always held that employers have the right to fire someone who makes statements they believe hurt their brand.

He is using he whistleblower defense in his lawsuit. Pretty smart

[Belsnickel]

(08-11-2017, 01:55 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: He is using he whistleblower defense in his lawsuit. Pretty smart

I don't think it will work. From what I have read from some employment law attorneys and professors on the subject, it is highly unlikely he has a chance to win. That being said, it may end up being settled in order for Google to save face.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(08-11-2017, 01:53 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: My source included the response to the complaints of his Memo. I shouldn't have to post the memo, it's quite amazing I had to even make a thread on the matter. The guy brought up legit issues.

See. Even you inadvertently admitted your source didn't include the items you're whining about other sources not including.

Thanks for confirming.

[StLucieBengal]

(08-11-2017, 08:53 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: I don't think it will work. From what I have read from some employment law attorneys and professors on the subject, it is highly unlikely he has a chance to win. That being said, it may end up being settled in order for Google to save face.

Yes it will be interesting to see where this goes. He has done a few interviews and I am anxious to hear them.

[StLucieBengal]

(08-11-2017, 10:17 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: See. Even you inadvertently admitted your source didn't include the items you're whining about other sources not including.

Thanks for confirming.

Where did I say I posted the entire 10 page memo? Just stop with the petty bickering. I posted a response to criticism to start a discussion, since it's pretty common for everyone to read at least parts of the memo.

It was a great jumping off point for a discussion in the office for us. Surprised to see it not discussed here..... I guess there were too many anti trump threads.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(08-11-2017, 12:39 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Where did I say I posted the entire 10 page memo? Just stop with the petty bickering. I posted a response to criticism to start a discussion, since it's pretty common for everyone to read at least parts of the memo.

It was a great jumping off point for a discussion in the office for us. Surprised to see it not discussed here..... I guess there were too many anti trump threads.

(08-10-2017, 07:15 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Hope you didn't read it from all the msm sources who purposely left out parts of the memo along with the graphs emphazing his points.

Stop making petty remarks like above when your source left out the memo and graphs emphasizing his points and I'll stop pointing them out.

BTW, your comment was criticism of someone else's response. I posted a response to your criticism of criticism. People call this witty back and forth banter a "discussion." If you don't want to have a discussion then don't pretend like you want to have a discussion.

I read your source, but I still haven't read th memo or seen the graphs which emphasized his points. I hope you didn't get your information from one of those fake news sites like the daily wire that omitted all of them.

[StLucieBengal]

(08-11-2017, 01:33 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Stop making petty remarks like above when your source left out the memo and graphs emphasizing his points and I'll stop pointing them out.

BTW, your comment was criticism of someone else's response. I posted a response to your criticism of criticism. People call this witty back and forth banter a "discussion." If you don't want to have a discussion then don't pretend like you want to have a discussion.

I read your source, but I still haven't read th memo or seen the graphs which emphasized his points. I hope you didn't get your information from one of those fake news sites like the daily wire that omitted all of them.

Then why are you commenting on this thread?

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(08-11-2017, 02:16 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Then why are you commenting on this thread?

Because I read your source whom you provided which didn't include the items you asked Matt if his sources contained.

So tell me; why are Matt's sources up for debate , but the source you used to start this thread is beyond reproach?