Houston, we have a problem
“We Have a Problem with Political Diversity”
THE PROBLEM
We are a political monoculture that’s
intolerant of different views. We claim to welcome all perspectives, but are
quick to attack—often in mobs—anyone who presents a view that appears to be in
opposition to left-leaning ideology. We throw labels that end in *obe and *ist at each other,
attacking each other’s character rather than their ideas.
We do this so
consistently that employees are afraid to say anything when they disagree with
what’s around them politically. HR has told me that this is not a rare
concern, and I’ve personally gotten over a hundred messages to that effect.
Your colleagues are afraid because they know that they — not their ideas — will
be attacked. They know that all the talk of “openness to different
perspectives” does not apply to causes of “social justice,” immigration,
“diversity”, and “equality.” On this issues, you can either keep quiet or
sacrifice your reputation and career.
These are not fears
without cause. Because we tear down posters welcoming Trump supporters. We
regularly propose removing Thiel from our board because he supported Trump.
We’re quick to suggest firing people who turn out to be misunderstood, and even
quicker to conclude our colleagues are bigots. We have made “All Lives Matter”
a fireable offense. We put Palmer Luckey through a witch hunt because he paid
for anti-Hillary ads. We write each other ad-hoc feedback in the PSC tool for
having “offensive” ideas. We ask HR to investigate those who dare to criticize
Islam’s human rights record for creating a “non inclusive environment.” And
they called me a transphobe when I called out our corporate art for being
politically radical.
WHY THIS MATTERS
This is not okay. Not
just for our internal culture, but for our own viability as a company. While
the problem isn’t unique to us, we are entrusted by a great part of the world
to be impartial and transparent carriers of people’s stories, ideas, and
commentary. Congress doesn’t think we can do this. The
President doesn’t think we can do this. And like them or not, we deserve
that criticism. We are blind to and dismissive of what people beyond our walls
(let alone even within our walls) think about complex issues that matter. I’ve
been here for nearly 6.5 years and this has gotten exponentially worse in the
last 2.
FB’ers for Political Diversity
I don’t know how to fix this problem on my own.
What I do know is that these issues can’t be fixed if we continue to be
isolated and silent. So that’s what this group is for:
(a) to be a space where you can talk about these
issues without fear of the mob, and in the process
(b) to talk about how we can fix this.
If you’re interested in helping make Facebook a
company that’s more tolerant and active-minded about different political and
ideological perspectives, join FB’ers for Political Diversity.
There’s only going to be one core rule in the
group, and it’s that if you attack a person’s character, rather than their
ideas, you will be banned.
Let’s see where this
goes.
##########
##########
Dozens at Facebook Unite to Challenge Its ‘Intolerant’ Liberal Culture
Facebook’s chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, told Congress
this year that he wanted the company to “be a platform for all ideas.”
Tom Brenner/The New York Times
By Kate Conger and Sheera Frenkel
Aug. 28, 2018
SAN FRANCISCO — The post went up quietly on Facebook’s
internal message board last week. Titled “We Have a Problem With Political
Diversity,” it quickly took off inside the social network.
“We are a political monoculture that’s intolerant of
different views,” Brian Amerige, a senior Facebook engineer, wrote in the post,
which was obtained by The New York Times. “We claim to welcome all
perspectives, but are quick to attack — often in mobs — anyone who presents a
view that appears to be in opposition to left-leaning ideology.”
Since the post went up, more than 100 Facebook employees
have joined Mr. Amerige to form an online group called FB’ers for Political
Diversity, according to two people who viewed the group’s page and who were not
authorized to speak publicly. The aim of the initiative, according to Mr.
Amerige’s memo, is to create a space for ideological diversity within the
company.
The new group has upset other Facebook employees, who said
its online posts were offensive to minorities. One engineer, who declined to be
identified for fear of retaliation, said several people had lodged complaints
with their managers about FB’ers for Political Diversity and were told that it
had not broken any company rules.
Another employee said the group appeared to be constructive
and inclusive of different political viewpoints. Mr. Amerige did not respond to
requests for comment.
The activity is a rare sign of organized dissent within
Facebook over the company’s largely liberal workplace culture. While the new
group is just a sliver of Facebook’s work force of more than 25,000, the
company’s workers have in the past appeared less inclined than their peers at
other tech companies to challenge leadership, and most have been loyalists to
its chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg.
But over the past two years, Facebook has undergone a series
of crises, including the spread of misinformation by Russians on its platform
and the mishandling of users’ data. Facebook has also been accused of stifling
conservative speech by President Trump and Senator Ted Cruz, Republican of
Texas, among others. This month, the social network barred the far-right
conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, a move that critics seized on as further
evidence that the company harbors an anti-conservative bias.
Within Facebook, several employees said, people have argued
over the decisions to ban certain accounts while allowing others. At staff
meetings, they said, some workers have repeatedly asked for more guidance on
what content the company disallows, and why. Others have said Facebook, out of
fear of being seen as biased, has let too many right-wing groups flourish on
the site.
The dispute over employees’ political ideology arose a week
before Sheryl Sandberg, Facebook’s chief operating officer, is scheduled to testify
at a Senate hearing about social media manipulation in elections. A team
helping Ms. Sandberg get ready for the hearing next Wednesday has warned her
that some Republican lawmakers may raise questions about Facebook and biases,
according to two people involved in the preparations.
On Tuesday, Mr. Trump again brought up the issue of bias by
tech companies with tweets attacking Google. In remarks later in the day, he
widened his focus to include Twitter and Facebook.
Those companies “better be careful because you can’t do that
to people,” Mr. Trump said. “I think that Google, and Twitter and Facebook,
they are really treading on very, very troubled territory and they have to be
careful. It is not fair to large portions of the population.”
‘We Have a Problem With Political Diversity’
A senior Facebook engineer wrote an internal message about
what he described as the company’s “monoculture.”
2 pages, 0.08 MB
Facebook has long been viewed as a predominantly liberal
company. Mr. Zuckerberg and Ms. Sandberg have donated to Democratic
politicians, for example, and have supported issues such as immigration reform.
The social network has sometimes struggled to integrate
conservatives into its leadership. Palmer Luckey, the founder of Oculus, the
maker of virtual reality goggles that Facebook acquired, was pressured to leave
the company last year, months after news spread that he had secretly donated to
an organization dedicated to spreading anti-Hillary Clinton internet memes. And
Peter Thiel, an outspoken supporter of Mr. Trump, has faced calls for his
resignation from Facebook’s board.
Mr. Zuckerberg publicly defended Mr. Thiel last year, saying
that he valued Mr. Thiel and that it was important to maintain diversity on the
board. In an appearance before Congress this year, Mr. Zuckerberg responded to
a question about anticonservative bias by saying he wanted Facebook to “be a
platform for all ideas.”
In May, Facebook announced that former Senator Jon Kyl, an
Arizona Republican, would lead an inquiry into allegations of anticonservative
bias on the social network. New employees also go through training that
describes how to have respectful conversations about politics and diversity.
Other Silicon Valley companies, including Google, have also
experienced a wave of employee activism over diversity. If tech companies are
willing to adjust their workplaces to make underrepresented groups more
welcome, some employees argue, they should extend the same regard to those who
do not fit the liberal-leaning Silicon Valley mold.
Mr. Amerige, who started working at Facebook in 2012, said
on his personal website that he followed philosophical principles laid out by
the philosopher and writer Ayn Rand. He posted the 527-word memo about
political diversity at Facebook on Aug. 20.
On issues like diversity and immigration, he wrote, “you can
either keep quiet or sacrifice your reputation and career.”
Mr. Amerige proposed that Facebook employees debate their
political ideas in the new group — one of tens of thousands of internal groups
that cover a range of topics — adding that this debate would better equip the
company to host a variety of viewpoints on its platform.
“We are entrusted by a great part of the world to be
impartial and transparent carriers of people’s stories, ideas and commentary,”
Mr. Amerige wrote. “Congress doesn’t
think we can do this. The president doesn’t think we can do this. And
like them or not, we deserve that criticism.”
A version of this article appears in print on Aug. 29, 2018,
on Page B1 of the New York edition with the headline: At Facebook, Workers Cite
Intolerance By Liberals.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/28/technology/inside-facebook-employees-political-bias.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/28/technology/inside-facebook-employees-political-bias.html
#######
To submit a
letter to the editor for publication, write to
letters@nytimes.com
Long talk short sense and the causes
of the problem are quickly identified:
It is not the cause of the problem with the Jews who invented the left-liberal, communist ideology, established
everywhere in the world and forced with all their might?
Is not the cause of the problem with the Jews and their left media (including the NYT) controlled by them who massively suppress unpleasant
truths, wipe them to pieces sweep them away or cover them up?
Jerzy Chojnowski
Chairman-GTVRG e.V.
Keine Kommentare:
Kommentar veröffentlichen