Leaked Video Shows Google Executives' Candid Reaction To Trump Victory (theguardian.com) 558
A number of Slashdot users have shared a leaked Google video from Breitbart, revealing the candid reactions of company executives to Donald Trump's unexpected victory in 2016. The Guardian summarizes: In an hour-long conversation, Google co-founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page, chief executive Sundar Pichai, and executives Kent Walker, Ruth Porat and Eileen Noughton offered their reflections on the election, sought to reassure employees about issues such as immigration status and benefits for same-sex partners, and answered questions on topics ranging from filter bubbles and political polarization to encryption and net neutrality. The executives' reactions ranged from the emotional to the philosophical to the purely pragmatic. Porat appeared near tears in discussing her open support for Hillary Clinton and her father, who was a refugee. Walker discussed global political trends toward nationalism, populism and xenophobia. Pichai noted that the company was already "thoughtfully engaging" with Trump's transition team. While Breitbart argues the video shows evidence of Google's inherent bias against Republicans, Google says the executives are simply sharing their "personal views" and that it has no political bias. It does beg the question, should politics be discussed in the workplace? Longtime Slashdot reader emil writes in response to the video: [...] Disregarding the completely inappropriate expression of partisan views in the workplace, the video claims that "history is our side." These executives appear to have forgotten the incredible tumult in the distant past of the U.S. The last election was not an electoral tie that was thrown into the house of representatives (as was the election of 1800). The last election did not open a civil war as happened in 1861 when Lincoln took office. The last election did not open war with Great Britain, and will likely not precipitate a new set of proposed constitutional amendments to curb presidential power as did either of James Madison's terms in office (War of 1812, Hartford Convention). There may be a time for tears, and a time for hugs, but that time cannot be in the workplace. Most Fortune 500 employees took the news of the latest president elect with quiet perseverance in their professional settings regardless of their leanings, and it is time for Google to encourage the same. "At a regularly scheduled all-hands meeting, some Google employees and executives expressed their own personal views in the aftermath of a long and divisive election season," Google said in a statement. "For over 20 years, everyone at Google has been able to freely express their opinions at these meetings. Nothing was said at that meeting, or any other meeting, to suggest that any political bias ever influences the way we build or operate our products. To the contrary, our products are built for everyone, and we design them with extraordinary care to be a trustworthy source of information for everyone, without regard to political viewpoint."
Nobody cares what Emil thinks (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Nobody cares what Emil thinks (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Nobody cares what Emil thinks (Score:5, Insightful)
I have to admit, I'm slightly curious as to how Emil knows so much about the private reactions of most Fortune 500 executives... I mean, that's some NSA level business espionage there.
I suppose Emil could be full of shit, but that would be highly irregular for a long-time Slashdot reader.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And this really wasn't that political. Dismay at Trump being president has nothing to do with being opposed to Republicans or not. Even many Republicans were dismayed that Trump was elected.
This sort of thing happened at many companies, there are indeed employees concerned about their immigration status, if their green card was going to get revoked.
Dismay of the inhuman and soulless corporation? (Score:2)
Per my second comment on this topic, I realized that "dismay" is a key word, but it was only mentioned in a handful of comments on the story, and yours was one of the two moderated as insightful. If I ever got a mod point...
I do think you raise an interesting new point about the google's dependence on international recruiting. To rise to the level of insight I think you'd need to go at least a step farther on the aspect of physical presence versus Internet-moderated tele-presence.
However, as I already wrote
Re:Dismay of the inhuman and soulless corporation? (Score:5, Insightful)
anti-truth perspective
At risk of defending Trump I think the entire US media and absolutely the social media companies have an anti-truth perspective.
Trust me, the truth may not be shared via Trump's twitter account but it sure as fuck isn't coming from his loudest opponents either.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yup, this is the far right through and through. They cry and piss and moan about their right to free speech, but then they try and shame any opposing opinion into silence and argue that action should be taken against them and/or their company to make it comply.
I have news for you, sometimes people have different opinions, it's well known that liberalism is prominent in California, especially in tech circles, so what the fuck is wrong with them expressing their liberal opinions? Last I checked despite Trump
Re: (Score:2)
This. If Emil has a reason why political opinions 'cannot' be discussed at the workplace, he may bring them forward. His personal, arbitrary, preference cannot be enforced as a social norm.
And you just hit the nail on the head for why political opinions need to not be a factor in the workplace! You don't want employers feeling that you must share their personal, arbitrary preferences--and, to put it bluntly, a lot of people believe that they are on the 'right side of history' without being so and cannot distinguish their 'personal, arbitrary preferences' from facts. (Actually, about the only thing history proves is that you probably should keep anybody who believes they are on the 'right si
Re: (Score:2)
Why? Is he saying that that those things were caused by discussing election results in the workplace? At least part of it seems to be addressing people's fears about their future in the company, as per the same-sex benefits and immigration status. And of course, net neutrality has a huge impact on Google's operations.
The short answer is Google avoids regulation, and limits that political organizations have on them as well as benefitting from protections that afforded under the DMCA for "(c) Information residing on systems or networks at the direction of users"
http://digital-law-online.info... [digital-law-online.info]
It's kind of hard to say they aren't acting as a viewpoint publisher/advocate and are eligible for those exemptions after seeing this video.
Hell if you are an advertiser, you might have a cause for a lawsuit on the basis they frau
Re:Nobody cares what Emil thinks (Score:5, Insightful)
That's a ridiculous view of President Swamp Drain (with all new billionaires).
Trump has had a huge impact on the business climate in America, right across the board, and he brags about it nearly every day. Plus his constant attacks on the MSM, where Google and Facebook are presently the two most powerful media aggregators on planet earth.
Trump's whole campaign was about detonating a shock and awe cluster bomb in Washington, D.C. And this from a man not known for delicacy or nuance. Any venture the size of Google not taking immediate stock of this Bravado New World deserves to have its C-suite head examined.
Re: (Score:2)
>"Trump has had a huge impact on the business climate in America, right across the board"
And yet this video was right after he was elected and hadn't DONE anything yet and wasn't even president yet. And nothing political being discussed was actually about BUSINESS. It was more of a whine fest on "feelings", not a reasoned examination of how it might affect business operations, competitiveness, revenue, policy, etc.
>"And this from a man not known for delicacy or nuance."
Well that is for sure.
Re: (Score:3)
Also here though - companies that claim impartiality are found to be manipulating the situation to favor an agenda. This might prompt regulatory oversight - anywhere from treating them as a utility with heavy oversight to some scrutiny (something like FRAND terms for patents - you can set the rules but must enforce evenly) to forcing transparency which might re
Re:Nobody cares what Emil thinks (Score:5, Insightful)
In addition to what epine said, California's tech industry is over 40% foreign-born [mercurynews.com]. Any candidate who runs on an anti-immigrant platform (even if it's only bluster and dog whistling) could be seen as an existential threat to the sector as a whole.
Biases and actions (Score:2)
The last election did not open a civil war as happened in 1861 when Lincoln took office.
"And Google showed anti-Republican bias then, as well." -- Abraham Lincoln
The campaign rhetoric was scary... (Score:5, Insightful)
Trump's campaign rhetoric really scared the crap out of many people. And not in a "OMG, Republicans nonsense!" way. In a "Are we going to start having to hide Muslim families in our basements?" way.
At this point, I think the main thing protecting everyone is the sheer incompetence and disorganization of his entire administration. Its clear now that he's far more interested Tweeting and continuing to hold those campaign rallies than in actually doing the job of President.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You sure that the ignorance across the populace in how the government actually works wasn't what scared people? It's as of people think the President controls all three branches of government (even those previous ones have tried to legislate through executive order).
Re:The campaign rhetoric was scary... (Score:5, Insightful)
There are people who honestly think stuff like that. I see this a lot in immigrants who assume the US government is just as authoritarian as in the old country But it's even more surprising to me that citizens born and living here for decades still seem to think the same way. The fact that more people show up to vote in presidential years than other years shows that they seem to think that the presidential election is more important than congressional elections.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
There are people who honestly think stuff like that. I see this a lot in immigrants who assume the US government is just as authoritarian as in the old country But it's even more surprising to me that citizens born and living here for decades still seem to think the same way. The fact that more people show up to vote in presidential years than other years shows that they seem to think that the presidential election is more important than congressional elections.
I see immigrants that come here and work to make the place just as bad as the one they left.
Hell I see people leave blue states because the taxes are killing them, and their livelihoods are under attack and then keep voting for the same people and policies that drove them out.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The echo chamber was what was scary. Liberals were psyching themselves out beyond reason. The Atlantic ran an article provocatively raising the question whether Jews counted as white, and people with whom I talked regularly (online) were with a straight face citing that article and telling me that questions were being raised about whether Jews counted as wh
Re:The campaign rhetoric was scary... (Score:5, Insightful)
Here's the thing though. The democrats ginned up roughly the same amount of fear and apprehension over Romney, W, Dole, Bush 41, and Reagan before him.
This wasn't at al l the same. You had people like George Will, and other moderate Republicans saying that Trump wasn't a normal Republican who they could support. I've spent every election since 1996 telling people on both ends of the political spectrum that it wouldn't be so bad if the candidate from the major opposing party won. There's one exception; this last election, because Trump really did represent a serious threat to the stability and functionality of American democracy and power. That some people cried wolf is not an excuse to ignore when the myriad people who hadn't previously been wolf criers start saying their's a wolf.
Re:The campaign rhetoric was scary... (Score:5, Insightful)
Here's the thing though. The democrats ginned up roughly the same amount of fear and apprehension over Romney, W, Dole, Bush 41, and Reagan before him.
Bullshit. I know it was called fake news, but I watched the video of Trump saying that if Hillary was elected people should take the 2nd amendment option. Sure, he was probably joking, but you have to really be a right-wing nut job if you think that's like other Republicans. None of the presidents you listed suggested killing (or jailing) their ravels. There are plenty similar examples were I had to look at the videos because I couldn't believe it was possible for Trump to be so awful. I know people legally here who literally left the country after Trump was elected. I've never seen or heard of that before. So, no, something is different this time. Eventually you'll realize who he is and regret your support.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:The campaign rhetoric was scary... (Score:5, Insightful)
There's a wide swath of people in any party. In the past I generally ignored what the wingnuts on the far left and far right though, they were in the minority. Lately though, the extremists in both parties seem to have gotten a hold of the controls.
Re: (Score:3)
There are no extreme leftists anywhere near control of anything.
Worst thing coming from that side is some oversensitive children screaming on the internet.
Also BTW, "wingnut" is an exclusively right-wing term. The left-wing equivalent is "moonbat".
Re: (Score:2)
Even setting aside quibbles with the scenario you describe, that still isn't any kind of control.
That's like saying that anarcho-primitivists took control of the country in the 90s because the Unabomber was a thing.
Reagan did pretty much what the left (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
How long have we had bases in Germany?
Adult supervision of Europe has been our 'longest occupation' by far.
Re: (Score:3)
This. Among other things, Trump promised a Muslim travel ban. Given that Google has multiple offices in the Middle East (Dubai, Haifa, and Istanbul), a sizable number of Google employees would have been directly affected by that, had it been implemented as promised (and some were probably affected anyway).
Re: (Score:3)
When he got elected, I said that this would be the truest test of checks and balances to date, but I never imagined he would be checked and balanced by his own staff. This is really turning out to be far more entertaining than I ever would have imagined.
Indeed, it has been. Its times like this that I'm grateful that the president actually isn't as powerful as all his supporters expect him to be. This episode may also lead to congress reigning in all those executive powers they openly dolled out during times that they liked the president.
Re: (Score:2)
This episode may also lead to congress reigning in all those executive powers they openly dolled out during times that they liked the president.
Neither party thinks like that anymore. They both just realize that eventually their turn will come around again and think of all of the "good" that they'll be able to do when they get to be king.
Re:The campaign rhetoric was scary... (Score:5, Informative)
Trump's campaign rhetoric really scared the crap out of many people. And not in a "OMG, Republicans nonsense!"
I seem to recall hearing 6 years of BUSH HITLER WORST PRESIDENT EVER
He got a reprieve for 2 years because even the Democrats weren't stupid enough to attack him right after 9/11
Speaking of stupid... (Score:3)
Meh (Score:4, Insightful)
So what?
A large group of youngish, diverse, highly educated, intelligent technologists were dismayed at Trump's election.
I fail to see anything surprising.
I'd be equally unsurprised by the (likely) positive mood at a morning sales meeting at a southern Indiana John Deere dealership.
Re: (Score:2)
As I remember, there was some dismay among Republicans after Trump won the nomination as well.
Re:Meh (Score:5, Insightful)
Some? I saw tons of dismay across the board. It didn't take long though for Republican leadership to start praising Trump.
I find so many things ironic and hypocritica. Bill Clinton not being good enough to be president because of bad character and poor morals (this was a louder criticism than criticism over his policies). A couple decades later and someone with worse character and morals is being promoted by the exact same people (led by hypocrite-in-chief Gingrich).
Re: (Score:2)
worse character and morals is being promoted by the exact same people (led by hypocrite-in-chief Gingrich).
We dodged a bullet when Gingrich didn't get elected.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, they were dismayed at the outcome.
Media are mostly biased... (Score:2)
Where can one go for true information these days? On the war in Syria, most media reports don't capture the real truth.
They do not "force" government to tell the truth.
In fact, this administration, fearing the loss of leverage in Syria, now says it knows Assad will use chemical weapons.
They do not mention that what Assad will be doing is what the American government did in Mosul, Iraq, or that Aleppo is now in relative peace after Assad established sanity there.
Was an interesting time capsule (Score:4, Insightful)
I watched pretty much the whole thing rather than reading excerpts. I thought it was an interesting window into the tech world and Google world specifically right after the election...
The video is meant to show bias, and it does - but it also shows at that point at least some expressed that there should be a willingness to listen to opposing views, a feel that now seems to be utterly gone from the left and also for Google internally where it is safe to identify you gender as Dragon, but not safe to identify as a conservative.
One thought that occurred to me as the Google employees and execs were having Q&A was - there was talk about inequality and low information voters. But both of those notions are way too simplistic.
One of the Google employees even brought to light the contradiction of the supposed "low information voter" by saying they consumed a lot of "fake news". Well that is MORE information, not low. And the reality is that a lot of what was considered fake news by some, was not really fake at all. In fact the reason Trump won was because we live in a high-information world now, where all of the people can understand the political class as a whole are scum rather than believing the truly Fake News that has been pushed on us for decades about all Washington politicians.
On the subject of inequality, it strikes me that people always refer to this in the financial sense. But most people do not care if someone makes more than them - otherwise why would we idolize music and movie stars? The inequality that is dangerous, is more the inequality of power not money - that is, the power over your own life. So many times we see people at high levels of government or business or really anything, get away with stuff where we know we would be in jail or worse. At the same time rules from those same people control more and more of what we are allowed to do personally. THAT is the kind of thing that leads to true resentment, a dangerous force.
Re:Was an interesting time capsule (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Was an interesting time capsule (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh, more data doesn't mean more information.
Like most words, "information" has many meanings, including in certain contexts entropy. But that's not what "low information voter" refers to. It refers to uniformed voters. You could watch North Korean TV every waking moment and you'd be absorbing plenty of data, but very little information -- in the sense of that which makes you informed.
Re: (Score:2)
As an Australian looking on a US politics, this is something I don't quite get. It's not that we don't have a similar right wing crazy politicians in Australia. We do. It's not that these loud right wing crazies aren't members of our version of your Republican party (who confusingly for Amercians call themselves the Liberals, but it's in reference to the John Stuart Mill definition of liberal). Most right wing
Other direction (Score:2)
I disagree on the direction people are being pushed - I follow a LOT of independently minded people on Twitter, who are not left or right wing, but actually have different views depending on the subject.
Almsot all of them are way more moved to the right, even to the point of sometimes defending Trump even though they might despise him.
The left has become the most puritan fascist force I have ever seen. Over my life I have voted for every party but there is no modern Democrat I can possibly hope to endorse,
Re: (Score:2)
Strangely, I was going to say the same thing with the polarities flipped. There's a lot of extremism out there and a lot of extremists who seem to delight more in their policies being rammed down "the opposition"'s throats rather than convincing them to compromise.
Re: (Score:2)
we live in a high-information world now, where all of the people can understand the political class as a whole are scum
That's an interesting thought.
Re: (Score:2)
The video is meant to show bias, and it does - but it also shows at that point at least some expressed that there should be a willingness to listen to opposing views, a feel that now seems to be utterly gone from the left and also for Google internally where it is safe to identify you gender as Dragon, but not safe to identify as a conservative.
People can have their own political views without letting it affect their work.
Also you need to consider how "conservative" has changed in the last few years - in 2013 the average conservative wasn't openly anti-democratic, openly sympathetic to if not supportive of white nationalism, openly hostile to the idea of an objective reality, and willing to give their party leaders every free pass and blank cheque in the book while they generally act like trashy 3rd-world gangster-politicians on the path to dictat
You made your bed, now lie in it (Score:5, Insightful)
The Citizens United ruling gave corporations the right to express political views. If you don't like it, you'll have to overturn that ruling with new legislation (and potentially an amendment).
I feel like the current administration only likes it when the laws work for them, and want to ignore laws that are inconvenient for them. It's the sort of crap that dictators of a banana republic try to pull.
(not AC because clearly non-partisan. i.e. hopefully I pissed off everyone)
Re: (Score:2)
I feel like every administration only likes it when the laws work for them, and want to ignore laws that are inconvenient for them.
FTFY
Re: (Score:2)
To varying degrees, yes. But it's important not to lose sight of the extreme nature of the current administration.
Re: (Score:3)
This is about how Google has vast influence in what you see and what you read on the internet.
Private business. Nothing you can do about it unless we grant new regulatory powers to an agency like the FCC.
Same for Facebook, Twitter, and any other large internet corporation.
That's why you can't easily treat this as an anti-competitive issue. There are too many players to do that, unless we can establish some kind of collusion between these businesses. But I feel that is unlikely to produce the desired results.
Do you want your government owned by corporations, no matter their ideology or principles, or do you want a Constitutional Republic that is for the people and by the people. If you chose corporation, you failed.
I'm not here to talk about your personal ideology. I've only pointed out the current state of affairs as I see them and offered suggestions on the way out. You ca
My irony detector just hit 11. (Score:4, Insightful)
While Breitbart argues the video shows evidence of Google's inherent bias against Republicans, ...
Breitbart arguing about inherent bias.
Re:My irony detector just hit 11. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, but I won't even claim Breitbart isn't 'black', despite there being more room to argue about it than Google.
Re: (Score:2)
>"Breitbart arguing about inherent bias."
Yeah, because stuff from MSNBC, Washington Post, NY Times, Huffington, or CNN would be SO much less biased [NOT]...
Finding relatively unbiased media has never been easy in the last 25+ years. It hasn't gotten better, just worse.... the only REAL difference is that the "mainstream" media is now being ever more pressured by Internet sources that can't be so easily "controlled" to fit their narratives.
Adult Children. (Score:2)
They look and act like they are nine years old.
They need to grow up!
This was a message to their employees (Score:2)
"Personal Views" my ass... (Score:4, Insightful)
Why do they need to make a company video to "reflect" on the political outcome?
I'm sorry google, you're full of shit. This isn't a personal view, this is a company view.
Re:"Personal Views" my ass... (Score:5, Informative)
IDK, it couldn't be that they made the video so other employees that couldn't attend also got the info from the Q&A...
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
IDK, it couldn't be that they made the video so other employees that couldn't attend also got the info from the Q&A...
That's even worse. Making a company video on company time and disseminating it to everyone not present is not expression of personal views. It's a training technique.
Freely Express their opinions at meetings (Score:3, Interesting)
"For over 20 years, everyone at Google has been able to freely express their opinions at these meetings"
Right!! What a laugh. I'm sure if someone walked up there and said "I'm so happy, Donald Trump will be our President" they might not have walked out of there alive.
No way in that meeting could you freely express your opinions.
How interesting (Score:3)
Now, they are arguing that a business should not have the rest of first amendment, even when it is just inside of the business.
I hope that SCOTUS gets a case out of this. It should be interesting to see what will happen.
Standard bash the editor post (Score:5, Informative)
Pity party (Score:3)
Oh. Some people don't share our "values." How awful.
Best part: we'll use our AI tech to "reach" those knuckle-draggers and educate them. LOL. At what point does such vast ignorance measure intellect?
Someone leaked this; a secret soul that has to exhibit the necessary group-think but actually despises these weird freaks and their intolerance.
Imagine the witch hunt that must be under way right now.
They had a point (Score:2)
I mean, not for nothing, but the Google executives turned out to be exactly right about Trump.
https://theconcourse.deadspin.... [deadspin.com]
And further, so fucking what if every Google executive later dropped their pants and took a giant shit into a MAGA hat? What's it to you? Go use fucking Bing and stop whining like little bitches just because the people running the most powerful corporations in the world were smart enough to realize that 304 racist electors had just installed the most corrupt president in modern hi
I don't get it (Score:4, Informative)
T is a rude arrogant narcissist (among other things) to a degree that overwhelms his party affiliation. Why the hell should anyone expect people to be happy about such as a President?
Not partisan in the least (Score:2)
Diversity of thought . (Score:5, Interesting)
"We want to encourage diversity of ideas."
JAMES DAMORE
"Whoopsie!"
Man they need an AWFUL big shovel for all that bullshit.
Whining, playing victim, and high treason (Score:2, Insightful)
Yeah republicans whine about anti-conservative bias, but aren't you trying to dictate what private individuals can say in a private business's private meetings??
Kind of like how Donald Trump chanted "lock her up" while he committed high treason, colluding with Russia's attack on America. And how he's now working to protect Russia from consequence while laying down our country's defenses against continued Russian attacks on America....
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
No, what we are saying is this is just another brick in the same wall.
Another sign, like all the rest, that shows how biased and leftist most big things are.
But thanks for pretending you don't understand all that.
Damore never went public himself (Score:2, Informative)
Others whose feelings are that gender is entirely a social construct and there is no psychological gender felt he is a heretic for proposing changes that'd make employment at google more attractive to people with a female mindset is a better way to attract women to google than the approach then in place. They started a whisper campaign against him and escalated that into a public shaming for wrong think. Much of that criticism accused him of writing things not contained in his memo an
Re:Damore never went public himself (Score:4, Insightful)
He never went public
No but he kept showing it to more and more and more groups until he got the reaction he wanted. I recall watching an interview he gave on youtube (it was long and had a sympathetic interviewer, no I don't recall the URL this was probably over a year ago) with Damore describing the process.
One thing that stood out to me was he took his work to the "skeptics group". It received a rather chilly reception there for reasons I think were correct. Basically they didn't like his reasoning, but they didn't give him a very detaild point-by-point rebttal or "debate" him. He took that as bias and kept on showing it around until it got a reaction. Which it did eventually as we all know.
Much of that criticism accused him of writing things not contained in his memo anywhere.
His memo was bad. I read it. The thing is if your work is clearly based on invalid prespposisions or picks a line of reasoning which reaches certain conclusions. You don't get a free pass on that simply because you didn't explicitly state those. In my person opinion (which acording to the groupthink here is wrong so I'll get silenced i.e. downmodded for it) the memo was not only excessively simplistic but relied on heavily cherry picked data.
It also didn't bring anything new which hasn't been hashed out very a thousand times before by substantially better writers with a better grasp of the literature. He waded into a known contentious topic both loudly (he KEPT on pushing his memo because he wanted a positive response) and very ill prepared. That's like taking a whack at a wasp nest with a baseball bat with no protective gear and standing around to watch the results.
So he got stung all over. Which was, to put it mildly, a bit predictable.
Re: (Score:3)
I guess he has to actually be racist.
You know instead of made up stuff created out of whole cloth by the left.
Does Trump lie? No doubt. I also remember a previous occupant of the White House who promised me I could keep my doctor, among other lies. But then he wasn't even the first occupant of that office to be a lying bastard. So in that respect Trump is about average.
Of course the promises Trump is keeping are the ones he made while campaigning, which scares not just liberals, but mainstream Republican po
Re:You’re free to express your views. (Score:4, Insightful)
Google is a private business. There are certain things they can't do (racial discrimination, age or gender discrimination) but overall, they can do whatever they want and they can be as biased as they want. Just as Fox News is extremely biased and constantly bashes Democrats.
And that's the way it should be. Private businesses have the right to be biased assholes, regardless of whether that bias is liberal or conservative. And that's why James Damore deserved to be fired. Not because he expressed a conservative opinion, but because he isn't smart enough to understand that the First Amendment applies to government, not private business.
Re: You’re free to express your views. (Score:2)
Governments havenâ(TM)t been significant gatekeepers on the flow of information in most western countries for decades, if not centuries. So if free speech legislation only applies to governments and not at all to massive private entities that today hold significantly more weight in that area, then the legislation is as good as useless and needs to be reformed.
Re: (Score:2)
Not in California [legalmatch.com].
Rob
Re:You’re free to express your views. (Score:5, Funny)
Say, this reminds me of an old Soviet joke... It is about a Soviet and an American arguing, which country has better Freedom of Speech protections.
The American says: "I can openly shout: 'Reagan is an asshole!' — and I will not be prosecuted".
To this the Soviet answers: "Big deal, I can call Reagan an asshole too — and I'll even be praised for it!".
Money equals speech! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Besides, Damore's piece wasn't "conservative" by any rational definition of that word.
Would you argue it was liberal? What wasn't conservative about it? I guess it wasn't advocating for a pre 21st century outcome. He actually expressed the desire to increase female participation so it could be interpreted as progressive / liberal but it expressed the opinion that differences in outcomes among genders was due to fundamental differences between genders which is the traditional 20th century since beginning of time view.
What if reality has a liberal bias? Still 2 sides? (Score:3, Interesting)
You got me to look at the troll. No congrats.
I think the insight question in this story is whether or not the google is supposed to help seek the truth or just tell people what they want to hear, even when they are seeking evidence to support false beliefs. Do YOU think there IS such a thing as the truth? If so, then you might even see the question as a struggle between good and evil--and it looks like evil is winning. Not just in American society, but within the google itself.
I actually described and predi
Re: (Score:3)
Wow! Look at all the thoughtful discussion that ensured. Not.
Not even a query as to whether it is fair to categorize "search results" as the kernel of the google's "corporate soul", whatever that might be. By the way, I think the other Slashdot-front-page google story about the resignation is joined at the hip there...
However, even without Slashdot's help (or perhaps I should say with the help of an imaginary audience that no longer exists on Slashdot), I did realize one more aspect of this topic. Or should
Re:You’re free to express your views. (Score:5, Interesting)
I am absolutely disgusted by the state of both major political parties today. Consider that there were dozens of candidates that made it quite far down the road in this election. And yet, when it came time to go to the polls, the American people were left with only two candidates because of the failed system.
You asked an excellent question. "Would you argue it as liberal?". I think that it's not an issue of whether it's conservative or liberal. I think that the issue is that we attempt to demonize one or the other. It is no longer socially acceptable to be a little bit of both. For example, what about a if you're a wealthy white Christian male who goes to church every Sunday, prays, but also believes it's not his right to have a say on abortion whether he approves of the action or not and also drives an electric car because he believes in global warming. This is a person who is clearly by today's standards someone who no longer has a home in America. See, that person is required to be either conservative or liberal though the liberals are probably against his economic and family policies. And saying you're Christian in Silicon Valley is such a big thing that there are TV shows about how big a thing this is. Yet, that same person could never express their more liberal beliefs out loud in a place like Texas.
American has polarized and things like Turducken is considered not only something fun to say... a lot, it's also entirely normal and acceptable. Yet, the human turducken which is a little bit of a mix of everything is no longer allowed because it's not within lines with the American way which is "Please stand in box A or box B... pick a side... you're either part of the solution or part of the problem... etc..."
This video expressed concerns
This is a man who came into the presidential office with such thin skin that he can't handle the attacks made against him by American corporations who exist only by the ability to churn and spew controversy... meaning the press. The news papers are in the business of selling news papers and because Trump is so incredibly outlandish, they can sell A LOT of them. Because of systems he himself strongly embraces and exploited extensively to become the president in the first place by using those systems against his opponents, the entire news world has transitioned from reporting facts and news, to publishing a great deal of supposition as well as opinions. News outlets have always shared their opinions. Walter Cronkite was an excellent example of an altruistic man who would break down and cry when something moved him and his voice and sincerity would move the entire world. But today, we don't publish this. We publish articles that take pot shots. They perform hit and run journalism with a focus on writing the headline that will sell today's paper.
Consider a news source like "The Register" who has a policy of writing absolutely nonsensical headlines as click bait. I've been reading them
Re: (Score:3)
I remember when everyone on Slashdot understood that "liberal" and "libertarian" were both kinds of "progressive".
If you don't like reductive approaches to political labelling, why would you try to bucket "liberal" and "libertarian" as "progressive"? Liberalism is a broad set of political concepts, and encompasses, for example, laissez faire economics, which would not reasonably be described as progressive. Libertarianism has some aspects that progressives like (bodily autonomy) but is often strongly anti-state intervention, and that is not something that would reasonably be described as progressive. I am using all the
Re:These comments are going to be a shit show (Score:5, Funny)
I'm sure this will be a reasoned, nuanced discussion because people who work in tech are above name calling, hasty generalizations, and stereotyping.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
There are far more middle class people (who ultimately pay most taxes) than 'poors'. Which is why Bernie and the like don't get elected. Thank dog.
Re:They tried so hard... (Score:4, Informative)
Conservatives are working hastily and efficiently to fix that...and also to thwart and ultimately dismantle democracy so that it doesn't come back to bite them in the ass.
Re: Walk away? (Score:2)
Nobody has silenced Republicans, save Trump himself. He is the only censor you need to consider.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Honestly I went to bed that night not caring because I knew she had a lock in and I voted for whom I wanted (which was neither of the popular options). When I woke the next morning and saw the news, I though it was a joke until I confirmed the results on several new sites. Then I thought, well at least the next four years will be entertaining to watch. So far I haven't been disappointed as I like to watch the
Re:what about when the south park writers shit the (Score:4, Informative)
Well, they did so realizing what a gold mine a Trump presidency means for the comedy industry.
Re: (Score:2)
MALA!
Re: (Score:2)
I doubt they laughed THAT hard.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
This is an advertising driven web site. Whipping up the masses to fight each other is how you make money in the new economy.
Re: (Score:2)
"They're just a bunch of pansies." - Madagascar
Re: (Score:2)