What People Are Getting Wrong About The #GoogleMemo


What people are getting wrong about the #GoogleMemo

(Read the memo here: Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber)

Or rather, how badly they are understating it.

The common, and entirely obvious, observation has been that the reaction by Google and much of the press confirms the concerns of the author, James Damore: a difference of opinion is effectively outlawed, then he is publicly shamed and eventually fired for his ‘crimes.’

Clearly their self-awareness is at amoeba levels, but the instant validation is only scratches the surface.

In their denouncement, critics have painted the ‘manifesto’ as the epitome of a vile and ‘violent’ sexist and racist rant devoid of any fact or reason.

Nothing could be further from the truth, so for this conclusion to have been reached requires not only that the author was right about Google’s fear and loathing of what it determines to be wrongthink, but that even the false characterisation of his content is also true.

That is to say, that had Damore actually said any of the things of which he is accused, their behaviour would have proved even that caricature correct, with the distinction that it would refer not to a population level analysis of sexual dimorphism within our species, but to the specific examples of the species operating within the Google environment, or even wider to the dogmatic ‘diversity’ advocacy circles within modern society.

Damore could have been as subtle as Genghis Khan and as sexist as, well, a Google diversity employee but in the opposite direction, in his presentation and assessment of the facts and he still would have been proven correct owing to their complete inability to perform basic reading comprehension of the pertinent information or the most rudimentary fact checking of the advanced claims.

In short, his calm, dispassionate, almost academic, presentation of facts and the reasonable opinions derived therefrom was not only a complete waste of diplomacy but far, far too generous of his subintellectual subjects.

He could have asserted the blanket claim that ‘the women, minorities, and their advocates within this building are completely incompetent to manage people, or a business’ and there would have been no factual basis given the evidence at hand from which to oppose even that most disparaging re-imagining of his message.

It is the scale of their failure that should be of greatest concern.

And now realise they own your data, and control many aspects of your digital life and communications.

Advertisements

, , ,

  1. Leave a comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: