"Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber"

[aygart]

Are you serious?

Also, that was less the opinion itself than the way he chose to express it.

He expressed it in an intentionally provocative and divisive way. Divisiveness is never helpful for team sports.

[henche]

The comparison to Kaepernick is apt.

This guy was fired because that memo being front page news is bad for Google's business. Just as Kapernick protesting the U.S. is bad for NFL business.

[aygart]

The comparison to Kaepernick is apt.

This guy was fired because that memo being front page news is bad for Google's business. Just as Kapernick protesting the U.S. is bad for NFL business.

I don't think that anyone protesting with BLM would have been an issue even if on the front page.

[Yehuda57]

The comparison to Kaepernick is apt.

This guy was fired because that memo being front page news is bad for Google's business. Just as Kapernick protesting the U.S. is bad for NFL business.

This guy is likely easily replaced in google.
I would think better football is better for NFL business, and he is quite clearly being blackballed.

I don't think that anyone protesting with BLM would have been an issue even if on the front page.

It doesn't matter how divisive it is. He is not getting a job because of [how he expressed] political views. If one has a problem with Google firing memo dude, Kaep's unemployment should be equally bothersome.

[Dan]

This guy is likely easily replaced in google.
I would think better football is better for NFL business, and he is quite clearly being blackballed.
 

It doesn't matter how divisive it is. He is not getting a job because of [how he expressed] political views. If one has a problem with Google firing memo dude, Kaep's unemployment should be equally bothersome.

I think owners are afraid of a fan boycott with CK.
That issue doesn't exist in Google. Have fun boycotting them.

[henche]

 

It doesn't matter how divisive it is. He is not getting a job because of [how he expressed] political views. If one has a problem with Google firing memo dude, Kaep's unemployment should be equally bothersome.

I think on either side ppl would tell you that there are some opinions which are crazy enough that its ok to be fired for publicizing them.

On the right, apparently that's protesting the flag.

On the left, apparently that's theorizing that women might be self-selecting to non-STEM fields. 

[henche]

I think owners are afraid of a fan boycott with CK.
That issue doesn't exist in Google. Have fun boycotting them.

Maybe they're afraid SJWs won't want to work for them?

[cholent]

The fact that a person cannot safely state his opinion about why an observed phenomena exists (in this case, women being under represented) is extremely troubling.

Everything else to do with his balagan is of less importance. Which of his points are right or wrong doesn't really matter as much as the fact that he is not entitled to his own opinion.

I partially agree with you. But would you feel the same if he had published a publicly available internal document about why Jews shouldn't be in top management positions because they are money hungry and will steal funds from the company or something similar?

[Dan]

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/450240/lena-dunham-google-demonstrate-eroding-free-speech-culture

[Dan]

I partially agree with you. But would you feel the same if he had published a publicly available internal document about why Jews shouldn't be in top management positions because they are money hungry and will steal funds from the company or something similar?

Read the memo again, he didn't say women shouldn't be engineers.

[aygart]

It doesn't matter how divisive it is. He is not getting a job because of [how he expressed] political views. If one has a problem with Google firing memo dude, Kaep's unemployment should be equally bothersome.

The how he expressed it is a very big difference. Had he kneel for the anthem for a totally uncontroversial reason it would have been almost the same.

On the right, apparently that's protesting the flag.

How is that an opinion as opposed to an action?

[hachover]

This guy was fired because that memo being front page news is bad for Google's business. Just as Kapernick protesting the U.S. is bad for NFL business.

Stating that he was fired because of how keeping him on would have reflected on Google is objectively true.

That does not change the main problem with this story, which is that in society today, it is unacceptable to share an unpopular opinion. To the point where the public raises the hue and cry demanding retribution.

[sguitarist18]

http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/07/opinions/google-employee-manifesto-against-diversity-opinion-randazza/index.html

Some great lines in there. I loved the part where he points out that in a 10-page letter, it's unlikely that a thinking person will either agree or disagree 100%.

And from the outcry about the original "manifesto," it's clear that people either didn't really read it, or are pandering to the masses who won't read it.

[henche]

Stating that he was fired because of how keeping him on would have reflected on Google is objectively true.

That does not change the main problem with this story, which is that in society today, it is unacceptable to share an unpopular opinion. To the point where the public raises the hue and cry demanding retribution.

I'm not sure.

There's a diff between sharing an opinion on Facebook or a blog, and broadcasting a 10 page memo as a Google employee.

[hachover]

And from the outcry about the original "manifesto," it's clear that people either didn't really read it, or are pandering to the masses who won't read it.

It's abundantly clear that most people didn't read it. But that's not important. The summary of his memo is an opinion that maybe the under-representation of women in tech is not sexism, rather it is nature taking its course. People can object to that without reading the whole memo. If they believe that it is only due to sexism, they have the right to believe that (and its probably the majority opinion).

[sguitarist18]

1) He shared it internally, he didn't go on a national talk show to broadcast his opinion to the world intentionally. Yes, it can get out, but that's the point - are you tryin to have a company that advocates only one point of view? And that's exactly his point.

2) He's not demanding change, he's not accusing anyone of anything...Someone should be allowed to share an opinion of mistakes a company is making, and ways to improve it, without being fired.

It's abundantly clear that most people didn't read it. But that's not important. The summary of his memo is an opinion that maybe the under-representation of women in tech is not sexism, rather it is nature taking its course. People can object to that without reading the whole memo. If they believe that it is only due to sexism, they have the right to believe that (and its probably the majority opinion).

True - I'm referring to quotes in one of the articles about a former senior engineer at Google saying that the Manifesto basically stated that women are not competent. He repeated again and again that individual women can excel, be as good or better than men in their field, and that generalizations have no bearing n any individual woman's ability.

[hachover]

I'm not sure.

There's a diff between sharing an opinion on Facebook or a blog, and broadcasting a 10 page memo as a Google employee.

He shared it on an employee-only intranet. I agree that there are grounds to fire whoever released it to the public.

[aygart]

I'm not sure.

There's a diff between sharing an opinion on Facebook or a blog, and broadcasting a 10 page memo as a Google employee.

How did he broadcast it?

[hachover]

He shared it on an employee-only intranet. I agree that there are grounds to fire whoever released it to the public.

My company also has an employee-only intranet that is similar to Facebook. We are encouraged to use it at work, as opposed to external social media, I assume to satisfy peoples' need to express themselves on social media without risking the company's reputation.

I have seen some pretty controversial discussions. As long as they are discussed in a professional manner, without an intent to degrade or bully, they are tolerated. If anyone were to copy that content to the public space there would probably be consequences.

[elit]

Are you serious?

yes obviously what he did is a factor.  I'm saying is he was good enough that would easily overlook it like the many other times they have overlooked much worse