5 ms·

While the job doesn't sound like it involves "cool things that matter" and paints a pretty believable picture of working at a large corporation, I do find it in

While the job doesn't sound like it involves "cool things that matter" and paints a pretty believable picture of working at a large corporation, I do find it interesting that this was published by thr Washington Post. Being owned by Amazon, a direct competitor to Google on many fronts (the war for cloud computing market share is/will continue to be huge), it seems suspicious that this is truly unbiased coverage. It strikes me as a possible next iteration of native advertising. This is not an attack on WP -- just something I thought might be worth discussing. The tech giants are becoming increasingly more powerful and this could be a new frontier to assert that power.

fortenforge 9y ago
The Washington Post is not owned by Amazon. It is owned by Jeff Bezos, who also is CEO of Amazon.
- dhimes 9y ago
  Distinction without a difference maybe?
peoplewindow 9y ago
It does seem an odd choice to publish. Sourcers (that's what Google calls people like that regardless of what his job title was) have existed for a long time there. I was recruited to Google by someone just like that. And yes it's clearly a very boring job: they're basically human search engines. Quite what the author thinks he'll gain by publishing this story is a little beyond me though. It doesn't sound like he was mistreated or anything.
- majewsky 9y ago
  > Sourcer If I were the manager of that department, I'd up-title them all to "sourcerers". :)
  - zaroth 9y ago
    And in doing so, make the author's point for them?
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
bhandziuk 9y ago
For every story like this out of Google there seem to be5 of the same sort out of Amazon.
uep 9y ago
While it's certainly possible there's some bias going on there, I can confirm that this guy really worked at Google. He contacted me a few months ago about a position, but I decided not to pursue a role there. Maybe this wouldn't have been published otherwise, but I definitely believe it to be genuine.
jahlove 9y ago
To be clear, Washington Post is not owned by Amazon. It's owned by Jeff Bezos. To accuse one of the nation's most respected papers of sacrificing its 139 year reputation over an opinion piece about working in Google HR is kind of farcical.
- dkobran 9y ago
  Thinking that tech money can't destroy a respected hundred year old publication is naive: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/09/when-silicon-valley-took-over-journalism/534195/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/09/when-si...

fortenforge 9y ago

The Washington Post is not owned by Amazon. It is owned by Jeff Bezos, who also is CEO of Amazon.

dhimes 9y ago
Distinction without a difference maybe?

peoplewindow 9y ago

It does seem an odd choice to publish. Sourcers (that's what Google calls people like that regardless of what his job title was) have existed for a long time there. I was recruited to Google by someone just like that. And yes it's clearly a very boring job: they're basically human search engines. Quite what the author thinks he'll gain by publishing this story is a little beyond me though. It doesn't sound like he was mistreated or anything.

majewsky 9y ago
> Sourcer If I were the manager of that department, I'd up-title them all to "sourcerers". :)
- zaroth 9y ago
  And in doing so, make the author's point for them?

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

bhandziuk 9y ago

For every story like this out of Google there seem to be5 of the same sort out of Amazon.

uep 9y ago

While it's certainly possible there's some bias going on there, I can confirm that this guy really worked at Google. He contacted me a few months ago about a position, but I decided not to pursue a role there. Maybe this wouldn't have been published otherwise, but I definitely believe it to be genuine.

jahlove 9y ago

To be clear, Washington Post is not owned by Amazon. It's owned by Jeff Bezos. To accuse one of the nation's most respected papers of sacrificing its 139 year reputation over an opinion piece about working in Google HR is kind of farcical.

dkobran 9y ago
Thinking that tech money can't destroy a respected hundred year old publication is naive: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/09/when-silicon-valley-took-over-journalism/534195/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/09/when-si...