5 ms·

Leaving the allegations totally aside the article does seem a bit misleading. The title is technically true but most people would read this as a company execut

by wand3r 8y ago

Leaving the allegations totally aside the article does seem a bit misleading. The title is technically true but most people would read this as a company executive-- a high-level employee. She is in fact an executive producer on a small Spanish language program. The article title sort of implies something like Reed Hastings/the board ousted chief communications officer Rachel Whetstone or something. If the allegations are true it could simply be a single bad actor within a small unit of Netflix operating with limited oversight. Obviously, I don't have knowledge of Netflix internal policies but my guess is that they don't regularly do stupid , easily detectable shit like this to break the law. At least, I hope they don't regularly do this.

mfarris 8y ago
The article isn't misleading at all. She is a company executive. Female executives getting fired for pregnancy is not unusual in the entertainment industry. It's disgusting, but not unusual. And HR is always eager to help the scumbag boss cover it up.
- wand3r 8y ago
  When I read it I thought of this definition of executive: A person with senior managerial responsibility in a business organization. Suitable or appropriate for a senior business executive[0] The actual content was a bit of a surprise/different than my expectations based on the title but may not have been intentionally misleading. Consider this article title: Top Manager fired from Facebook, alleges pregnancy discrimination With the content being something like: Alice, a top project manager in charge of development for an upcoming internal tool for Spanish speaking Facebook employees, alleges her termination was due to discrimination. Again, pregnancy discrimination is dumb from a legal standpoint, a cultural/employee motivation standpoint, a PR standpoint and generally just bad practice all around. I am simply discussing how the article title seems to frame this as a higher level Netflix internal problem when it seems likely this is just one bad actor who had autonomy over a project and abused his authority. [0]https://www.google.com/search?q=Dictionary#dobs=executive https://www.google.com/search?q=Dictionary#dobs=executive

by wand3r 8y ago

mfarris 8y ago

The article isn't misleading at all. She is a company executive. Female executives getting fired for pregnancy is not unusual in the entertainment industry. It's disgusting, but not unusual. And HR is always eager to help the scumbag boss cover it up.

wand3r 8y ago
When I read it I thought of this definition of executive: A person with senior managerial responsibility in a business organization. Suitable or appropriate for a senior business executive[0] The actual content was a bit of a surprise/different than my expectations based on the title but may not have been intentionally misleading. Consider this article title: Top Manager fired from Facebook, alleges pregnancy discrimination With the content being something like: Alice, a top project manager in charge of development for an upcoming internal tool for Spanish speaking Facebook employees, alleges her termination was due to discrimination. Again, pregnancy discrimination is dumb from a legal standpoint, a cultural/employee motivation standpoint, a PR standpoint and generally just bad practice all around. I am simply discussing how the article title seems to frame this as a higher level Netflix internal problem when it seems likely this is just one bad actor who had autonomy over a project and abused his authority. [0]https://www.google.com/search?q=Dictionary#dobs=executive https://www.google.com/search?q=Dictionary#dobs=executive