4 ms·

The details provided in the response are probably being disclosed legally (doubt Amazon PR would screw up that badly), but it shows really poor taste that they

The details provided in the response are probably being disclosed legally (doubt Amazon PR would screw up that badly), but it shows really poor taste that they would even respond to the NYT piece which was pretty clearly hyperbolic, emotional, and somewhat cherrypicked; even more so that they would adopt the same tactics of naming and shaming ex-employees. The fact that it was also published on medium by the head of PR baffles me - why are they aiming this refutation at the tech crowd that would probably see through this cover-piece pretty easily, instead of getting it into a high-readership, Amazon consumer oriented publication? Poorly planned and executed all around, regardless of legality.

eclipxe 11y ago
The tech crowd (at least on HN) didn't see through the cover-piece...the comments here were overwhelmingly along the lines of "I knew it! Horrible environment". A lot of confirmation of existing anti-Amazon bias.
- roymurdock 11y ago
  I'm assuming they published it on medium as a blog post targeting the tech community because they were trying to persuade potential future employees that Amazon is a good place to work. Yet Carney smeared the NYT and ex employees rather than highlighting the positives (I'm sure there are many, but I don't know what they are because he didn't mention them) of working at Amazon. Better yet, Amazon could have just carried on being a good place to work. If your company is doing good, important things its going to take a lot more than a biased NYT piece to really deflate employee sentiment and drive down the quality of your applicants. "Show not tell" is usually a good principle to operate on.
  - serge2k 11y ago
    Even before the times article amazon had a rep as a place that ground through people in a year or two.
    - retbull 11y ago
      That was my impression and after talking to several friends over there it hasn't exactly gone away. Even people who still work there 5-6 years later give it at best mixed reviews. I don't know how to interpret the mudslinging but I don't think that Amazon is all fun and games.
  - caskance 11y ago
    Show not tell doesn't work. Otherwise there would be no such thing as marketing.
  - CaptainZapp 11y ago
    I'm assuming they published it on medium as a blog post targeting the tech community because they were trying to persuade potential future employees that Amazon is a good place to work. What it actually shows to me is that Amazon really is a horrible place to work. Splattering internals from employee files onto a public forum in order to smear them (because none of those smears actually refute what those employees said) is the same underhanded tactic Scientology uses to smear critics, who happen to be ex-members. I for one would never, ever work for an employer willing to use such despicable tactics.
Dylan16807 11y ago
>it shows really poor taste that they would even respond I'm not sure how to respond to this, except that the idea makes me deeply upset.

eclipxe 11y ago

The tech crowd (at least on HN) didn't see through the cover-piece...the comments here were overwhelmingly along the lines of "I knew it! Horrible environment". A lot of confirmation of existing anti-Amazon bias.

roymurdock 11y ago
I'm assuming they published it on medium as a blog post targeting the tech community because they were trying to persuade potential future employees that Amazon is a good place to work. Yet Carney smeared the NYT and ex employees rather than highlighting the positives (I'm sure there are many, but I don't know what they are because he didn't mention them) of working at Amazon. Better yet, Amazon could have just carried on being a good place to work. If your company is doing good, important things its going to take a lot more than a biased NYT piece to really deflate employee sentiment and drive down the quality of your applicants. "Show not tell" is usually a good principle to operate on.
- serge2k 11y ago
  Even before the times article amazon had a rep as a place that ground through people in a year or two.
  - retbull 11y ago
    That was my impression and after talking to several friends over there it hasn't exactly gone away. Even people who still work there 5-6 years later give it at best mixed reviews. I don't know how to interpret the mudslinging but I don't think that Amazon is all fun and games.
- caskance 11y ago
  Show not tell doesn't work. Otherwise there would be no such thing as marketing.
- CaptainZapp 11y ago
  I'm assuming they published it on medium as a blog post targeting the tech community because they were trying to persuade potential future employees that Amazon is a good place to work. What it actually shows to me is that Amazon really is a horrible place to work. Splattering internals from employee files onto a public forum in order to smear them (because none of those smears actually refute what those employees said) is the same underhanded tactic Scientology uses to smear critics, who happen to be ex-members. I for one would never, ever work for an employer willing to use such despicable tactics.

Dylan16807 11y ago

>it shows really poor taste that they would even respond I'm not sure how to respond to this, except that the idea makes me deeply upset.