No surprise, leftist groupthink companies commonly don’t understand why the people who work for them aren’t compliant zealots.
This is what happens when you stop telling the mentally ill that they’re mentally ill and you stop telling the stupid that they’re stupid. When you give legitimacy to stupid ideas and weak people you destroy everything.
I’d take this article with a pinch of salt.
Source: I work at Google.
It’s almost like national politics shouldn’t be brought into the workplace. Huh.
The only anti-conservative bias issue they mention is that Cernekee guy. I just read an article on Techdirt saying he was pretty much a Nazi sympathiser. If not wanting people like that in your company is bias against conservatives, I’d be perfectly fine with it.
Leftist ideology does tend to lead to in-fighting and ruin.
>One major source of those issues is the company’s acceptance of “aberrant geniuses,” according to former CEO Eric Schmidt. “You need these aberrant geniuses because they’re the ones that drive, in most cases, the product excellence,”
Haha, the dorks made the company great now they are the problem.
Right after they started laughing at their core ethic : “Don’t be evil.” Cool tech companies attract shits as they grow successful. Party’s over.
**James Damore** shows us this like two years ago. Google is staffed by hysterical science deniers and political ideologues who lash out at anyone not exactly like them
Just like any other large organization or company.
Anybody who has ever interacted with Twitch.tv’s support can tell you that big tech companies have some serious internal culture issues.
*That being said*- the issues mentioned here are specifically centered around political dialogue at Google, which the Wired article explains and addresses.
I’ve worked at 4 Bay area tech companies at this point. Two of them were household name (well, one of them was a household name in all of the US and the other was a household name among tech workers), and two relatively medium size (200-2,000 employee range).
First, when it comes to reporting on big tech companies take everything you say with a grain of salt, or two, or better yet make it a handful. At least, keep in mind that there’s a massive conflict of interest between the traditional media model (pay journalists to write articles and sell ads) and things like Youtube, Facebook, and other social media. A significant portion, 30-40% my estimate, have significant exaggerations and sometimes even outright falsehoods. Case in point, two Google employees I know explained that Rubin was accused by his mistress after having an affair with another woman. Google fired him but Rubin would have sued, claiming that Google did not give him due process and is trying to get out of paying him close to $100M by using a false accusation. And the only piece of evidence Google had was the testimony of the accuser – good luck winning that lawsuit. The payout was what Google was contractually obligated to pay him. If Google didn’t pay out, they’d be getting sued in court. And if they lost (which there’s a strong change they would) it would be terrible not only for Google, but also all women coming forward with sexual assault claims as a notable court case like this would cast a lot of doubt over other accusations.
Second, while there is a vocal segment of the population that really cares about the political issues most employees just want to do good work and rake in that sweet TC. I worked in a very progressive SF company, and maybe one or two people on each team really cared about politics but the most just cared about work. I do think there are issues around excluding conservatives (open denigration of Trump supporters, calls to avoid hiring people that don’t approve of HR’s affirmative action, etc.) and this causes a perception of bias. But the companies’ aren’t just using their gut to decide what to allow and what not to allow. They do analysis on user behavior to decide company policy, there’s enough money on the line that it’s just not acceptable to let personal biases seep in. It probably would be better if SV tech companies were more welcoming of conservatives, but the reality is that the computer science and software are overwhelmingly liberal in general. So there isn’t much incentive to change, as these companies aren’t losing out on many employees and it’s probably not worth it.
Anyway, those are my 2 cents.
“Google has a massive culture problem”, states one example that happened five years ago.
[I recommend everyone just read the Wired article. It shows how Google’s policy of open discussions have fostered communities from all ends of the political spectrum that have been heating up with the polarization of the country. It’s not a utopia for conservatives or liberals. It’s a mess on the political and social front. There is no anti-conservative bias because it can’t even form a unified opinion anymore. ](https://www.wired.com/story/inside-google-three-years-misery-happiest-company-tech/)
Except Cernekee is a white supremacist asshole.
Good. My body is ready for the DuckDuckGo age to begin.
business insider is trash, but come on. google is a huge corporation with way too many people and it’s been around a long time, of course it has culture problems.
Stop hiring me top A programmers. Get the B and C guys.
“People at mega-corp not super happy with jobs. Area bars happy with increased sales. *Babies who murder? Do you remember where you put your offspring?* Stay tuned for news at 10.”
I work at another bay area tech company and based what Business Insider ‘reports’ about my company/field I would take everything they say with a teaspoon of salt.
In other news, water found to be wet. You know a company has jumped the shark when all of the “news” coming out about them is their internal social battles and diversity education. If a company doesn’t focus on their business, then they are a dead man walking.
Heh. I turned down s job interview when they sent me a ten hour coding challenge. Who the fuck has time for that
Your email address will not be published.