Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Facebook Social Networks

Zuckerberg's Quest to Explore Future Featured Mostly White Men (bloomberg.com) 217

Facebook chief executive Mark Zuckerberg completed his 2019 "personal challenge" on Monday, his version of a New Year's resolution. From a report: This year he pledged to "host a series of public discussions about the future of technology in society -- the opportunities, the challenges, the hopes, and the anxieties." The problem? Almost all of Zuckerberg's discussions were with fellow white men -- who have always dominated the technology industry. In the six discussion videos Facebook posted throughout the year, 8 of Zuckerberg's 9 guests were male, and all of them were white. Seven were professors or doctors -- and all but one were over the age of 40. The group's homogeneity speaks to one of the biggest criticisms of Silicon Valley: That tech is primarily driven and shaped by the decisions of white men, a reality evident in the employee demographics for almost all major technology companies. Facebook has positioned itself as a leader in the push to diversify the industry, and even promised earlier this year to double its female workforce in the next five years.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Zuckerberg's Quest to Explore Future Featured Mostly White Men

Comments Filter:
  • What? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by JoeyDot ( 5981942 ) on Tuesday November 26, 2019 @02:14PM (#59458342)
    How is this even news?
    • Re:What? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 26, 2019 @02:30PM (#59458474)

      White liberals are the only racial group to hate themselves.

      • ... to not want to hang around with Mark Zuckerberg!

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        White liberals are the only racial group to hate themselves.

        Which is fine by me, except that they angrily demand that everyone else share their hatred.

      • White liberals are the only racial group to hate themselves.

        As JoeyDot said: "How is this even news?"

      • Re:What? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by LordWabbit2 ( 2440804 ) on Wednesday November 27, 2019 @12:20AM (#59461084)
        They are also the only racial group who can't take pride in being in a racial group.
        Black Pride, Black lawyers / reporters / doctors association et al are all deemed Ok.
        White anything is a big no no.
        It's not so much that they hate themselves, it's more that they are not allowed to be any other way, otherwise they get labelled as Nazi's, or right wingers or rednecks or whatever.
    • It's getting to the point where I can tell a msmash post just by the headline.

    • It's news because the percentage of totally white people is declining, but somehow they're supposed to be the ones to tell us all what the future will be like. Mixed-"race" people are the fastest-growing group in the US, primarily hispanics like myself. The next-fastest growing group is supposedly "asians", which I thought we weren't saying any more :)

    • well obviously if you want to discuss future of technology you do that with kids from north korea.
      because obviously they are the experts.

      look it's already silly if they're focusing on who is talking with who instead of what is talked about. even if they had been talking about how to bring internet to the poor kids in africa, thats not noble enough, because obviously it should have been some poor african kids who should have been discussing something they have no means of affecting at all, I guess.

      who should

  • by imperious_rex ( 845595 ) on Tuesday November 26, 2019 @02:15PM (#59458348)
    I'm sure all the comments will be civil, level-headed, and insightful.
    • I'm sure all the comments will be civil, level-headed, and insightful.

      Given the post title, I'm sure it was meant to be a giant 'Efff You to the majority of Slashdot's reader demographic. One of those cases where an editor's story post is itself flamebait.

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Even this joke is modded "flamebait" by at least one person.

  • by Headw1nd ( 829599 ) on Tuesday November 26, 2019 @02:16PM (#59458356)
    Can we moderate this submission? I'd like to suggest -1 Flamebait.
  • by BAReFO0t ( 6240524 ) on Tuesday November 26, 2019 @02:16PM (#59458360)

    If most of them are white men, then he necessecarily will discuss it with white men. Duh.
    Are you a sexist racist or why do you have a problem with that?

    Or are you a discriminating prejudiced bully that implies sexism and racism in others by default?

    If yes, then I suggest you Check Your [SJW] Privilege!(TM)

    • That doesn't mean it's OK to be prejudiced (aka irrationally judging and discriminating) against him or harm him like he does others. Unless, of course, you see him as some kind of role model for you...

    • ... in the list of little girls?
      I demand more large hairy men to be in this group that is defined as "people with vaginas and two X chromosomes whose brain developed female, under the age of 8"!
      This is an outrage of sexist "ageist" discrimination!! /s

    • It's unequivocally racist but it would be a valid point that it might give only a single perspective as the group tends to have more things in common on average than a random selection. It may help to ask a wider sampling of people about their views on the impact of technology on society. Many people might agree with that. Does he have to? No he doesn't. It is however a limitation that would be fair to point out. While it would be a valid comment, front page news?

      Of all the different things, race is the
    • I have to agree to a point. I really canâ(TM)t fault him in this case, as much as I would like to. There are few white women in the IT field specifically in the areas of the technology and coding aspect. There are vastly fewer people of color, that are female, in the tech industry. There are plenty of tech males of Asian and Indian descent, but otherwise its not as populated.

      There are two sides to this coin that suggests that theres a bias against women in the tech industry. One rather overlooked side

  • Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Tuesday November 26, 2019 @02:20PM (#59458390)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 26, 2019 @02:20PM (#59458400)

    So no analysis of what was said, just criticism of who said it. Tech is tech. Do you think minorities don't deserve the same technology as white males?

    • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 26, 2019 @02:26PM (#59458446)
      Only if they developed it. Otherwise it's cultural appropriation.
      • Sorry, but no. Cultural appropriation does not work two ways; the definition has been revised so that only members of a dominant (i.e. white) culture can be guilty of cultural appropriation. No, I'm not kidding [wikipedia.org]
    • Well it's good that we have gotten past looking at what kind of inappropriate T-shirts people are wearing, now we're back to counting colors and mammary glands.

      Seven were professors or doctors

      In other words they were qualified. Or one would hope so. Some professors I'm not so sure about... particularly the ones who worry about diversity first and facts second.

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Do they want the same technology as white males?

      Have you seen that video of the hand dryer that only detects white hands and doesn't work for Indians? I'm guessing they don't want that.

  • by TimothyHollins ( 4720957 ) on Tuesday November 26, 2019 @02:29PM (#59458466)

    Because if there's anyone that understands the future of tech, it's young black lesbians with a degree in dance therapy.

  • by bolt_the_dhampir ( 1545719 ) on Tuesday November 26, 2019 @02:42PM (#59458534)
    A whole lot of the people in Silicon Valley *MOVED THERE* after becoming successful. Nobody is stopping you from having a great idea, nobody (sane) checks the skin color of the CEO of a company before signing up for a new killer service, nobody checks your genitals when you apply for a domain name. If you're an LGBTQetcetc person with an awesome idea, GO FOR IT! How is your non-whiteness or less-than-40-years-old-ness holding you back?
    • If you're an LGBTQetcetc person with an awesome idea, GO FOR IT! How is your non-whiteness or less-than-40-years-old-ness holding you back?

      From what I've seen, at quite some distance, their LGBTQetcetcness is holding them back because they're so busy obsessing over that part of their identity that they don't have time to do any complex work. I know several gay people, of various sexes, and 99% of the time I forget they're gay. None of us are in the sex industry, so our sexual proclivities are irrelevant to our work. But we're not in the land of special snowflakes either, so we just get on with work and life.

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      nobody (sane) checks the skin color of the CEO of a company before signing up for a new killer service

      Even in the current climate of anti-Chinese sentiment you don't think people think twice before signing up to Chinese services? Or contracting projects out to Indian firms after reading stories like this [slashdot.org]?

      You might even argue that it's a good thing that they don't do business with Chinese people because their technology might end up being copied.

  • For some reason, I rather doubt Karl Wagner even took the time to inquire as to the criteria used to select the ones that were interviewed, or to create a list of people that should have been interviewed instead.
  • OLD white men. X’D
    Oh, the humanity!

  • So, why DID he pick these particular people? Seriously the article didn't comment on the fact almost all of them had brown eyes did it?
    I bet every one of them wore shoes too. Until we get to the point where skin color, eye color, hair color, ect are all in the same category of importance as a personal trait, we will not overcome racism. The article seems to suggest either he picked or should have picked people based on there skin color and sex?

    If he didn't give it any thought then the article is sugge

  • by twocows ( 1216842 ) on Tuesday November 26, 2019 @03:04PM (#59458690)
    If, by the summary's own admission, the tech industry has always been dominated by white men, and he's having conversations with people in the tech industry, then does it not follow that his conversations will largely be with white men?

    Supposing that the summary's assumption that the tech industry has always been dominated by white men is true, then that would mean you would need to go out of your way to talk to people from the tech industry who are not white men. That would mean treating people differently on the basis of race and gender: you'd pick who you wanted to talk to on the basis of their race or gender rather their merits.

    Back in elementary school, the definition I was given for racial discrimination was "treating people differently because of the color of their skin." I imagine gender discrimination would fall under a similar definition. We were told that this was wrong and that you should always judge people on the content of their character, not the color of their skin. So then, I ask, what exactly are the writers at Bloomberg suggesting that Mr. Zuckerberg should be doing?
    • by fenrif ( 991024 )

      Sorry, the term "racism" has been re-defined in the past decade. It now means "things white people do." Have a nice day.

      Unless you are white, of course.

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Well the western tech sector is getting fairly saturated now. Everyone has a phone, everyone has social media etc. The major growth areas are China and India and Brazil and soon other developing nations.

      So just from a purely economic standpoint it might be a good idea to find people who have some experience of living in those cultures and making tech products for them. The assumption that they want exactly what white western customers want is probably flawed.

  • by reneerd ( 6412616 ) on Tuesday November 26, 2019 @03:05PM (#59458692)
    So where do you discuss or point out or cite that these people are not the BEST at what they do and just happen to be white males? Or are you saying that forced diversity is better than merit? I seriously hope not. Otherwise you are right there is racism/sexism but its not Zuckerburg that is the racist and sexist.
    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Are they the BEST at what they do?

      Zuckerberg was born to a psychiatrist and a dentist who helped him get to Harvard via private schools. His application claimed he could speak Latin and ancient Greek. Then he lucked out by stealing some other guys' idea and being a bit of a dick at just the right time.

      Gates was born to a lawyer and board member, so likewise gave him every opportunity and assistance including private school. The Mother's Club at the school bought them a terminal and booked time on a mainfram

  • by volvox_voxel ( 2752469 ) on Tuesday November 26, 2019 @03:22PM (#59458812)

    "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

    I spent the first few years of my life as the only white kid in an all black school. Even the teachers hated me, and was ostracized and vilified, despite being a friendly kid. I've had first hand experience with racism, and have a low tolerance of it from any direction. I really dislike all of this anti-white & identity politics.

  • by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) on Tuesday November 26, 2019 @03:27PM (#59458840)

    If Zuckerberg wants to talk to a lot of people who have the power to change the near future, then by definition that means he talks to whatever group there is... the demographics are irrelevant.

    Can you point out a Lead of Color (LOC) with significant power he bypassed? No? Then what is your damage Heather?

    I mean it would be great and all if Zuckerberg talked to some gender neutral albino entity, but what effect would it have on the future of technology?

  • by AbRASiON ( 589899 ) * on Tuesday November 26, 2019 @04:15PM (#59459100) Journal

    Seriously? This is extreme leftist / politically correct / looking for offense bait. These people are never happy, constantly naval gazing and theorizing the political angle of any and everything "Are tissues racist" etc? "Could drinking water be considered a hate crime?"

    Stop it, go away, go and live in some weirdo, cultist, extreme left, fragile area of the internet, go there and sulk all you like about the rest of the world. We all know you guys, left to your own devices, will 'eat each other' as you're all hammers, looking for nails.

    Terrible submission. Get out of here, slashdot has too much common sense for this bullshit.

  • The new statistics project that the nation will become âoeminority whiteâ in 2045. During that year, whites will comprise 49.7 percent of the population in contrast to 24.6 percent for Hispanics, 13.1 percent for blacks, 7.9 percent for Asians, and 3.8 percent for multiracial populations.

    Because minorities as a group are younger than whites, the minority white tipping point comes earlier for younger age groups. The new census projections indicate that, for youth under 18 -- the post-millennial population -- minorities will outnumber whites in 2020. For those age 18-29 -- members of the younger labor force and voting age populations -- the tipping point will occur in 2027.

    Seniors, age 60 and above, will continue to be majority white after the year 2060. The latter can be attributable in the near term to the staying power of the largely white baby boom.

    The US will become ''minority white'' in 2045 [brookings.edu]

    There you have it. The geek's labor force, his markets and his political base is changing. You can sell tech to seniors, but to expect them to be your driving force force or first adopters is problematic.

  • Are you saying there's something wrong with white men? If so, what?
  • by King_TJ ( 85913 ) on Tuesday November 26, 2019 @05:26PM (#59459472) Journal

    This is really NOT a worthy news item, so much as another person hyper-sensitive to perceived discrimination where none really exists.

    As the black woman in charge of H.R. at Apple recently said (and was attacked for!), true diversity doesn't necessarily mean a room full of people with different skin color or genders. Diversity means a group that has different strengths and weaknesses, but who were all selected as "best fits" for the work they're employed to do for the company.

    The fact Zuckerberg spoke with a number of people over age 40, alone, is nice to see, IMO, because the most pervasive form of discrimination in I.T. today is really AGE discrimination. But at the end of the day, if you want to talk with experts in I.T. about where the future is headed, you want to interview the people actually helping CREATE that future today. I know the industry has all of this guilt and self-loathing because they haven't been able to attract as many minorities or women to the field as they'd like. But who cares?! You play the game with the cards your dealt. Microsoft and others keep dumping millions of dollars into initiatives to get more women to code, or to go into STEM fields. Yet the results haven't changed much. Most women just aren't interested in doing it for a living. You could dump millions into trying to get more men to take up knitting .... but results would likely be similar.

  • Then most of them would have been Japanese. Problem solved.
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • We don't care what they look like ... why do you?
  • So there's an Irishman, a German, and an Israeli, along with a bunch of Americans of varying ancestry. Apparently all white people look alike to Mr. Wagner, the racist.

Business is a good game -- lots of competition and minimum of rules. You keep score with money. -- Nolan Bushnell, founder of Atari

Working...