Google: The Diversity Mix Up

August 7, 2017

Update August 8, 2017: The alleged author of the alleged essay about the alleged anti-diversity in the alleged area of the US known as “Silicon Valley” has allegedly been terminated. The alleged action means that the alleged individual is available for alleged “work”. None of that “rest and vest” malarky. See “Google Fires Author of Divisive Memo an Gender Differences.” Alleged gender differences do not allegedly exist. Allegedly that’s good to know before writing an essay and posting it so that alleged management practices are allegedly committed to a distribution system. This alleged activity is allegedly “real” news. Ah, science clubs. Ever entertaining.


Update 2 August 8, 2017: Sundar Pichai, the fellow who is handling assorted hot tater tots for the Alphabet Google thing issued a memo called “Note to Employees from Sundar Pichai.” The write up said:

“This has been a very difficult time.”

Hey, great insight. That’s what makes Google a smart company. Well, sort of smart if one discounts the dust up in the European Union, the solving of death thing, and telling China it had to change. The point of the write up is that suggesting anyone who is biologically disadvantaged when a colleague is a bad thing. I noted this statement because I am stupid and I have to be told things multiple times. (Right, mom? Right, dad?)

“The pas few days have been very difficult for many at the company, and we need to find a way to debate issues on which we might disagree—while doing so in line with our Code of Conduct.”

There is nothing like a Code of Conduct? I wonder if Margrethe Vestager has a copy of that document?


Beyond Search noted the diversity excitement at Alphabet Google, the legions of Google users, and the handful of folks who dare to take a stance against Google. Beyond Search has characterized Google-type companies as semi-adult science clubs. None of the write ups listed below reference this prescient and accurate parallel:

The Motherboard story about “Internal Viral.

The screed itself

The write up wanting empathy, just not for the author of the screed.

News flash. The likelihood of change is like a calculus problem with a student who is not into zero but not zero.

Our view in Harrod’s Creek is that one who does not comprehend the value of the Google-type of approach to actual practice and the subsequent PR infused activity may want to steer clear of a Google-type of company.

What is interesting is that this is another example of the increasing vulnerability of Alphabet Google. I could be like Elizabeth Barrett Browning and count the ways, but I will not. Ms. Barrett Browning was secretive and I thought that she might have been interested in laudanum. If true, she might have lifted a languorous hand to add to the Google diversity discussion.

But maybe not. She was into whipping up excitement for Italian politics, which may have been a comparatively more important topic.

The science club like thinker will reject Ms. Barrett-Browning’s interest. One cannot count, measure, or weigh passion. Interesting but not scientific. Talking is not counting, calculating, or analyzing real things, is it? Consider addomg emotional intellingence to screed’s about Google-like management methods and staff selection processes? Nah.

Stephen E Arnold, August 7, 2017


Comments are closed.

  • Archives

  • Recent Posts

  • Meta