Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Politics
posted by Fnord666 on Monday June 19 2017, @01:26PM   Printer-friendly
from the round-two dept.

According to Politico, heads of some tech companies will be meeting with the President on Monday. But the lower echelons of techdom are pushing back on engagement with the Trump administration.

The fraught relationship between the country's leading tech executives and President Donald Trump is about to get even more tense.

The latest uncomfortable moment arrives Monday, when top tech CEOs are expected to sit down with Trump at the White House to talk about modernizing government technology. Many of the companies have refused to confirm their attendance publicly, in a sign of how sensitive their dealings with the Trump administration have become in a liberal Silicon Valley that loathes his policies on issues like immigration and climate change.

Despite unease and rumblings from below, many are going to attend anyway.

Even so, executives from Google's parent Alphabet, IBM, Cisco and Oracle will be among those in attendance, as will billionaire tech investor Peter Thiel. Other corporate participants named in media reports include Apple, Amazon, Microsoft and possibly Facebook. Those four companies have all declined to comment on their plans despite repeated requests, and sources close to Alphabet and IBM only confirmed their participation Thursday. Companies declined to comment for this story.

Politico seems to think that tech workers have more clout with regard to the political activities of their bosses, an interesting point of view.

Indeed, as the leaders of multinational corporations, tech executives have a financial obligation to shareholders to engage the federal government, which sets key industry regulations and, in many cases, buys their products. Some, including Apple CEO Tim Cook, have expressed a moral and patriotic responsibility to weigh in on public policy matters where executives have expertise.

But now companies face growing pressure from their liberal employees and chunks of their customer base to resist the White House over its actions on immigration, climate change and transgender rights. And even though the CEOs have become more vocal in their criticism of Trump — over the Paris pullout, for example — their argument for continued engagement is becoming riskier as Trump's political agenda skews further and further away from the progressive worldview.

And that could have workforce implications. Technology workers, particularly engineers, hold special sway over their bosses compared to employees in other industries. They have in-demand technical skills that companies often struggle to find, and often have more leeway to speak their mind with less fear of reprisal.

So is it true that tech workers have more pull than the average corporate cog? Will this affect technology policy of the Untied States of America?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by linkdude64 on Tuesday June 20 2017, @03:47AM (5 children)

    by linkdude64 (5482) on Tuesday June 20 2017, @03:47AM (#528327)

    c0lo, you have a real talent for writing irrelevant non-statements which have no measureable effect on discussion.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday June 20 2017, @05:41AM (4 children)

    by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday June 20 2017, @05:41AM (#528347) Journal

    Doesn't everybody?
    (Am I that special?)

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
    • (Score: 2) by aristarchus on Tuesday June 20 2017, @06:55AM (3 children)

      by aristarchus (2645) on Tuesday June 20 2017, @06:55AM (#528357) Journal

      Two points:
      Point one" Linkdude62 is more specialier! He can lob a "irrelevant non-statement which has no measureable effect on the discussion" into a gnat's ear at near up to a thousand yards!
      Point two: There was no discussion going on, only pathetic emotional response by a betrayed and abandoned American Conservative (formerly denominated as "a Republican").
      .
      That is all.

      • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday June 20 2017, @10:01AM (2 children)

        by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday June 20 2017, @10:01AM (#528397) Journal

        That was somehow evident to me.
        My attempts were directed towards inciting a discussion (oh, wow, almost a rebellion), as pointless as it may have been in/by itself.

        --
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
        • (Score: 2) by linkdude64 on Tuesday June 20 2017, @09:05PM (1 child)

          by linkdude64 (5482) on Tuesday June 20 2017, @09:05PM (#528723)

          "My attempts were directed towards inciting a discussion"

          Your post was claiming that I randomly hit keys on my keyboard to create my comment, and that is pretty much all.

          • (Score: 3, Insightful) by c0lo on Tuesday June 20 2017, @11:13PM

            by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday June 20 2017, @11:13PM (#528776) Journal

            I was asking how exactly did you get to post such in incoherent rant, Godwining the thread just from the start.

            Did you see my question of "(Am I that special)"? 'Twas an invitation to a self-reflection on the quality of your post/position. You know? one of the qualities critical thinking requires - finding weaknesses not only in the positions of the others, but also in the ones advanced by you. (was that invitation too subtle for you?)

            --
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford