8 ms·
Twitter’s head of diversity is leaving and its chief HR officer has already left
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- anubisresources 10y agoEveryone is leaving the sinking ship!
- jjawssd 10y agoTwitter even went so far as to shadow ban President Trump
- gozur88 10y agoIs that true? They seem to have forgotten they're running a business.
- toss1941 10y agoNot sure, some users were claiming that his tweets weren't appearing in their timelines. Not like CNN is going to investigate though.
- jjawssd 10y agohttp://i.imgur.com/qbO8RAt.png http://i.imgur.com/qbO8RAt.png This has been coming for a while: http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/02/16/exclusive-twitter-shadowbanning-is-real-say-inside-sources/ http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/02/16/exclusive-twitter-s...
- toss1941 10y agoI do know for a fact they shadow-banned or throttled Scott Adams, who is far from a conservative but likes to practice free speech and is very open about what he finds problematic on his side of the aisle. Most of his tweets never appear on my timeline.
- anigbrowl 10y agoYou'll need to do a lot better than that. If I screenshotted it every time TWitter broke down momentarily I could make all sorts of wild claims. Also FOH with that nazi news network.
- jjawssd 10y agoTwitter shadow banned the following October 3, 2016 Tweets. When Twitter shadow bans Trump’s tweets, the public can no longer see any of the tweets, and only users who replied or re-tweeted the tweet’s can see said censored tweet — or if one knows the URL/web address of the tweet, one can see said censored tweet. Here are the URL/web address for each one (take note that hardly anyone has re-tweeted or liked any of them): 1 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783101590299291648 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78310159029929164... 2 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783101691105128448 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78310169110512844... 3 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783101896869318656 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78310189686931865... 4 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783101996777639936 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78310199677763993... 5 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783102584458350592 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78310258445835059... 6 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783102939015417856 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78310293901541785... 7 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783103193546829826 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78310319354682982... 8 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783103262333345792 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78310326233334579... 9 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783103327764553728 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78310332776455372... 10 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783103555058020352 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78310355505802035... 11 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783103649006260224 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78310364900626022... 12 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783103762256703488 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78310376225670348... 13 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783118975240634372 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78311897524063437... 14 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783107076327284737 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78310707632728473... 15 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783107034375790592 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78310703437579059... 16 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783106986095185920 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78310698609518592... 17 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783106934941417472 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78310693494141747... 18 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783106881292148736 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78310688129214873... 19 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783106816607596544 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78310681660759654... 20 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783106772613537792 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78310677261353779... 21 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783106671723720704 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78310667172372070... 22 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783106624302960640 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78310662430296064... 23 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783106566903869440 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78310656690386944... 24 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783106498314379264 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78310649831437926... 25 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783106427925635072 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78310642792563507... 26 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783106371478654976 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78310637147865497... 27 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783106286590111744 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78310628659011174... 28 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783106245947297793 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78310624594729779... 29 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783106157275549696 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78310615727554969... 30 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783106201403875329 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78310620140387532... 31 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783106037700108288 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78310603770010828... 32 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783105928249737218 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78310592824973721... Twitter deleted the following October 3, 2016 Tweet: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783101384564482049 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/78310138456448204...
- flamedoge 10y agoOh no, how will we know our next impending doom?
- anigbrowl 10y agoExtraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
- throwaway420 10y agoWait, there's actually a position called "Head of Diversity"?
- sp332 10y agoWell discrimination is illegal, and the the Department of Labor will sue you if your numbers are bad like Google's. https://www.fastcompany.com/3066914/innovation-agents/google-and-tech-struggle-to-hack-bias-and-diversity https://www.fastcompany.com/3066914/innovation-agents/google... Google spent a quarter-Billion dollars trying to improve diversity for apparently no gains. It's an important thing to get right, and after a company grows to a certain point it takes a lot of effort to change.
- mistermann 10y agoHonest not antagonistic question, why is it important to get right?
- sp332 10y agoYou'll miss out on less talent. Your teams will be better at problem-solving if they have diverse backgrounds and outlooks (not just genetic "heritage" but that can be a half-decent proxy). You're not going to contribute to racism, sexism etc in society at large which might be driving groups apart culturally or denying certain opportunities to certain groups of people. And the DoL won't sue you :)
- FT_intern 10y ago> You'll miss out on less talent. This is assuming that the diverse candidates who actually have talent aren't being hired. That's the argument you need to be making > Your teams will be better at problem-solving if they have diverse backgrounds and outlooks If you want teams that are better at problem-solving, why don't you directly judge applicants based on their problem-solving abilities in a team environment instead of using diversity as a proxy for problem solving ability (which has not been proven at all)?
- hueving 10y agoIf your company has a head of diversity, your company is bloated and this person isn't going to fix diversity. I view these strictly as PR positions because I have yet to see anything useful come out of them.
- vkou 10y agoIs this because you don't believe that employees have a problem with monocultures? Or because the initiatives they undertake don't address the problem?
- HarryHirsch 10y agoCompany culture is set by the leadership, if leadership is in the way any effort by the diversity guy is futile. I have never encountered a single one that wasn't a figurehead and several that were a nuisance.
- hueving 10y agoThey definitely don't fix the problem. As the sibling comment points out, diversity is a result of tons of factors - office locations, industry sector, compensation packages, pto, work life balance culture; and, most importantly, the diversity of the candidate supply itself (you're delusional if you expect a large deviation from graduation ratios). It's sort of similar to hiring a "head of profit". Profit, like diversity, is the outcome of the entire company's operations.
- matt_wulfeck 10y agoI've yet to see anything come out of the PR-driven "diversity" push anyway. Call me back when those above the age of 55 can get jobs in Silicon Valley.
- matwood 10y agoThe fact you picked 55 instead of 30 says changes have already occurred in the right direction. Hopefully it continues.
- hubert123 10y ago"Diversity" is not a problem that needs a fix in a tech company. Hire the best people for the job, end of story.
- cr__ 10y ago"Slavery" is not a problem that needs a fix on a plantation. Purchase the best people for the job, end of story.
- laser 10y agoOften the best people for the job (the holistic purpose of the company or problem at hand) requires diverse input. For example, you can hire a bunch of designers who individually kick ass, but if they're all from similar backgrounds, their output is likely to fail to account for the preferences of large segments of users from other backgrounds.
- ng12 10y agoA designer's job is to design for people with different backgrounds (or else we'd still be using the terminal for everything). We should not distill people's value down to their background, regardless of whether it helps fill a diversity requirement.
- frogfuzion 10y agoI think I would thoroughly enjoy job shadowing this person. I'm very curious as to what their day to day activities would be!
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- yardie 10y agoProbably reaching out to minority college programs, graduates, and professional organizations. If your black, woman engineer, for example, you aren't necessarily reaching out to your old boys network for prospective jobs. I'm assume you assume they sit in their chair all day and spin around in circles.
- frogfuzion 10y agoHarsh. No. I just had no idea and would be honestly curious. Just as I would be of any other job I never knew existed!
- yardie 10y agoMy apologies. I thought you were being facetious. Loads of posters on HN are when if it doesn't conform to their own world view.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- cup 10y agoProbably because both the head of diversity and HR rep know how toxic twitter is and have given up on any kind of reform. Any person thats a minority and basically not a white guy has to run the gamut when it comes to twitter. The comments here are a testament to that. Calling a company with a head of diversity bloated for instance is telling of your politics.
- throwaway420 10y ago> Calling a company with a head of diversity bloated for instance is telling of your politics. So is it offensive to subscribe to MLK's general idea of judging people not on the color of their skin, but on the content of their character?
- tstactplsignore 10y agoNo offense but MLK did not agree with you, would not agree with you, and taking some words that are easy to white-wash out of the context of his true political philosophy is insulting. [1] http://www.nola.com/opinions/index.ssf/2014/04/martin_luther_king_jr_explicit.html http://www.nola.com/opinions/index.ssf/2014/04/martin_luther...
- ihsw 10y agoThe spirit of MLK's teachings is that we should look beyond color, not remedy discrimination of the past by tilting the scales in favor of colored people.
- dragonwriter 10y ago> The spirit of MLK's teachings is that we should look beyond color, not remedy discrimination of the past by tilting the scales in favor of colored people. Actually, tilting the scales in favor of previously-discriminated-against groups (including, but not limited to, "colored people") until such time as the resulting disadvantage from that discrimination was remedied is exactly and concretely what King advocated, for example, when calling, in Why We Can't Wait, for a "Bill of Rights for the Disadvantaged" parallel to the "GI Bill" (then known as the "GI Bill of Rights") for veterans. The right wing has taken to presenting, on the basis of a single line in the "I have a dream" speech, an utter fabrication about King's philosophy that conflicts with what King himself wrote and said on the specific issues for which they deployy the fabrication as an argument.
- minikites 10y agoMany of these comments seem to indicate that lots of people are threatened by diversity, that maybe their privilege is ending and they might start getting treated as equals. And to those commenters who think current hiring practices are fair: Are Emily and Greg More Employable than Lakisha and Jamal? A Field Experiment on Labor Market Discrimination "We find little evidence that our results are driven by employers inferring something other than race, such as social class, from the names. These results suggest that racial discrimination is still a prominent feature of the labor market." http://www.nber.org/papers/w9873 http://www.nber.org/papers/w9873
- forgetsusername 10y ago>Many of these comments seem to indicate that lots of people are threatened by diversity Because the position of "VP of diversity and inclusion" sounds ridiculous? >These results suggest that racial discrimination is still a prominent feature of the labor market. This surprises precisely no one. What does it have to do with the article?
- tubehouse 10y agoAlmost everyone agrees with the idea of hiring based on merit instead of prejudice. But I very often see diversity advocates attacking the idea of merit-based hiring. For example, making fun of people that use the word "meritocracy" has become a popular meme. Personally I'm not sure how to account for this discrepancy.
- anigbrowl 10y agoPerhaps because 'meritocracy' is sometimes advanced as an excuse for ignoring other factors, without the proponent investing the effort to actually use double-blind method for selecting among applicants to avoid the possibility of bias among hiring managers.
- rm_-rf_slash 10y agoExpecting employers to "fix" diversity imbalances is like rolling up to Anthony Bourdain in a garbage truck and telling him to do his best with dinner. The problems with social inequality go waaay back. They go back to single-parent homes. They go back to childhood environments of violence and drug use. They go back to inequalities in access to food, water, shelter, K12 education, the internet, name it. We Americans live in an outrageously unfair society that we are largely complicit in by not doing anything to change it beyond writing comments on the internet and wanting it to just happen already. So if you leave it up to the employer to have a "diverse" workforce, diversity is already dead.
- ryanjodonnell 10y agoTwitter engineer here. Our engineering culture is actually pretty great - diversity is something we strive for and have made great improvements at, but definitely not at the expense of hiring talented people. Check out this article published yesterday from a relatively new manager to hear what it's like on the inside: https://medium.com/@kathleencodes/the-surprising-things-ive-learned-about-twitter-engineering-culture-925929113be4#.ofg77x4hd https://medium.com/@kathleencodes/the-surprising-things-ive-...
- tabeth 10y agoI've sat in interviews for most positions (at where I work, anyway). The only one that requires actually knowing who the person is (gender wise, race wise, etc) is sales. Even in that case, it's only because of preexisting prejudice. These companies will figure out sooner or later that anonymous interviewing is the only solution. Those who benefit from the status quo will protest, "rightly so". Those who don't won't be around to complain, and so a kind of survivorship bias persists.
- ohfunkyeah 10y agoI think you give up way more with anonymous hiring than you would ever get in return. How do you gauge verbal and non-verbal communication skills? Do they mesh well with the team. Once you drop the in-person interaction you lose more than just the ability to discriminate.
- tabeth 10y agoI fail to see what any of that has to do with knowing who the person is. You might be right, though. As I mentioned, those benefiting from these things will obviously protest it.
- ohfunkyeah 10y agoIt's not entirely clear to me what you mean here: You don't see how meeting a person would remove some of their anonymity? Or when you say anonymous do you just mean we can't know who the person is by name? But we can meet them, talk to them, etc...
- tabeth 10y agoAgain, it's possible to have an anonymous candidate you can talk to. Voice obfuscation, prohibited questions (to ensure anonymity, etc.) There's nothing inherent in needing to know who the person is. If you disagree I'd love to hear some scenarios. Sure it's more difficult to do so, which I agree with. However, the only people who will claim that as a reason NOT to do this will be people who are benefiting from how the system is already, or have something else to lose. The dollar amount to implement this is trivial. If you've ever been to any of those anonymous chat rooms, that's an example. You could then conduct a full interview that way, and have an independent third party source check all of the credentials. Boom. You're done. This whole thing can be implemented with a standard application form (to initially remove identifiers such as name and school) and a Slack channel.
- ProfessorLayton 10y agoI'm sure a lot of the departures are just those leaving the sinking Twitter ship, but this person leaving so soon doesn't bode well for either party. Diversity-as-an-initiative once a company has grown to a large size is seemingly a futile exercise as evidenced by these diversity reports, year after year. If companies are actually serious about diversity, they need to make it part of the company's culture from the beginning, before all the typical tech hiring inertia takes place.
- linkregister 10y agoLate change is better than no change at all.
- ihsw 10y agoActually this pandering to diversity fanatics is a pointless endeavour -- all this ingratiating just wastes people's time while normalizing racism. We used to teach kids to be colorblind but now we're teaching them to see nothing but color. It's a sad state of affairs.
- forgetsusername 10y ago>We used to teach kids to be colorblind but now we're teaching them to see nothing but color. I don't think either method worked.
- gumby 10y agoIn an ideal world you would be correct and I hope nobody would disagree with your ideal desire (well, I know some do). The reality, however, is still far from there. The point of diversity programs is not to accentuate the differences (although it can have that as a second order side effect), but simply to increase the rate at which these barriers break down. There are plenty of studies that show that people who are around others who are "different" (whatever the dimension: body shape/color, religion, political views, etc) in general stop being bothered by the differences. So it's in everybody's interest to try to get more of that. And in the long term it's good for business, even if it may or may not be in the short term -- but why should't corporations invest in the long term?
- ihsw 10y agoWould you still strive for "diversity" if it received no attention in social media and it didn't score brownie points with progressives?
- Omnius 10y agoWhy should the motivation matter?
- ihsw 10y agoI'm implying that it serves no constructive purpose other than pandering to bleeding-heart liberals, and that if it didn't appeal to them then Twitter HR and PR teams wouldn't think twice about "diversity."
- ryanjodonnell 10y agoAt the end of the day, I just want to work with the best people for the job. Evidence has shown that without a commitment to diversity, some of the best people can be overlooked or passed over during the interview process, and some evidence shows that diverse teams in fact outperform non-diverse teams.
- dang 10y agoWe've banned this account for repeated incivility and using HN for political battle, which is an abuse of this site. We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13601982 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13601982 and marked it off-topic.