SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Google is struggling to discuss the recent diversity memo controversy internally:
Google's CEO, Sundar Pichai, canceled a scheduled all-hands staff meeting—moments before it was scheduled to begin—meant to address concerns over a controversial essay published by former employee James Damore.
In an email to staff, Pichai explained that questions from employees had been leaked and that, in some cases, specific employees' identities were revealed, exposing them to harassment and threats. Instead of today's large-scale meeting, which was to be livestreamed to Google's 60,000 employees worldwide, smaller groups will meet sometime in the future.
"We had hoped to have a frank open discussion today as we always do to bring us together and move forward. But our Dory questions appeared externally this afternoon, and on some websites Googlers are now being named personally," Pichai said in the email.
Also at CNET.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Friday August 11 2017, @02:17PM (9 children)
He seems to be saying that his social engineering efforts might be endangered if the public knows about them? Some employees have been named? Mmmm. Whatever. Oh yeah, transparency. That's a good thing, unless it threatens my own plans, then transparency ain't so good.
(Score: 4, Informative) by takyon on Friday August 11 2017, @02:32PM (1 child)
Let's not play dumb here. If your name is linked to any sort of controversy opinion online, you're likely to receive daily death threats, pizzas 'n' Qurans, get doxed, have your employer called (not really applicable here), and other unsavory stuff. Theoretically, if you anger the wrong person you could become a real target for real harm or assassination, but there are lot of bluffing keyboard warriors out there and much bigger fish to fry anyway. Non-transparent this move may be, but most inner workings of corporations aren't public... until a few employees revolt.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Sulla on Friday August 11 2017, @03:09PM
Example, the guy who wrote the original memo
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Friday August 11 2017, @05:30PM (3 children)
Oh yeah, transparency. That's a good thing, unless it threatens my own plans, then transparency ain't so good.
You seem to be implying a double-standard by Google here. Like they were totally fine with the first leak.
That's crazy talk! They're in the middle of a gender pay gap investigation with the DOE! [wired.com] Then this dumbass posts that women get less raises because of their gender!
Pretty sure they're opposed to all the leaks...
(Score: 2) by cubancigar11 on Friday August 11 2017, @07:40PM
Thank you.gif
(Score: 2) by slinches on Friday August 11 2017, @09:14PM (1 child)
Then why didn't they publicly fire the guy that leaked the memo instead of the guy that wrote it?
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Saturday August 12 2017, @07:22PM
Because they don't want to solve anything. It's a power grab with diversity as the excuse and tool. In Soviet union they also had political commissars, informants, etc.
When the people of Iran got fed up with their Shah. Theocrats (Islamist's) and the Left worked together to overthrow the government. Once it succeeded the Islamist's continued to kill the Left as a response to their help. There are similarities here. Once diversity people has served their usefulness to power grab. They are not likely to be treated well.
(Score: 2) by darkfeline on Friday August 11 2017, @07:15PM (2 children)
This is an internal meeting. Whether or not the meeting was canceled doesn't affect public transparency.
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday August 11 2017, @08:26PM (1 child)
Uh-huh. Internal meetings happen all the time. "Don't discuss this with ANYONE, this is confidential!" And, before the meeting is even over, spouses and special others already have all the details. And, personally, unless I actually agree that the meeting should be secret, I don't feel bound by any of that confidentiality bullshit. And, obviously, no one else does either.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 12 2017, @09:26AM
That's what I thought, too. First time that they said that Runaway was caught in the wrong bathroom, but appropriately dressed, I thought, well, OK, we will just keep this internal. But then it happened a bunch of more times, and I thought, no way we can keep a lid on this! And finally, there was the police chase, the public exhibitionism, that everyone in Texarakansas saw on the evening news, and I thought, who am I to try to keep this secret anymore? So, sorry Runaway, we can't keep you identity a secret anymore! May god have mercy on your sole.