9 ms·
Why shouldn’t employees of the company with the goal of organizing all the worlds information debate politics? Everything is political. Especially information.
by taurath 7y ago
Why shouldn’t employees of the company with the goal of organizing all the worlds information debate politics? Everything is political. Especially information.
- BurningFrog 7y agoBecause they have work to do. That's why they're there.
- arcticbull 7y agoTheir job is to create a forum for others to debate, and to try and maintain neutrality. Their own politics aren't necessarily relevant. Everyone wants to be able to have their political opinions, try and convince others, and not get fired. It's kind of a pick-2 situation. Feel free to bring politics in with ya so long as you embrace the philosophy that you can say anything you want on your last day.
- root_axis 7y ago> Their job is to create a forum for others to debate, and to try and maintain neutrality What? Says who?
- arcticbull 7y agoOthers as in not their employees. Google indexes all the worlds information, who says their goal is to impose their opinion on it? Isn't neutrality in indexing the assumption?
- Nevermindmine 7y agoWhy would you assume that?
- cameronbrown 7y agoSpeaking for myself here. Yes and no. Ranking by definition means not being neutral, it's just that society has decided that it's acceptable to rank spam lower than other content. Neutrality looks a lot like bias from the perspective of spammers. When you're dealing with more complex signals at scale there are so many second and third order effects that are hard or impossible to predict. For example, the conservative bias everyone's talking about doesn't seem to me to be literal bias against the right, but bias in favour of mainstream news sources which are overwhelmingly left-wing. I'm sure there are many issues in Search like the one I just described, and being able to have these conversations is what makes it possible for Googlers to spot these issues, decide if it's even an issue and fix it. If you ban a certain type of conversation, you'll change how people think about a potential issue.
- root_axis 7y ago> Google indexes all the worlds information They do not collect anything even remotely close to "all the worlds information". > who says their goal is to impose their opinion on it Their goal is to make money. Whether they impose their opinion on the index is a business decision. > Isn't neutrality in indexing the assumption? Why would it be? What if the people that run google have a fundamental disagreement with certain political ideas and have a desire not to index those things?
- TheCapn 7y ago>Everyone wants to be able to have their political opinions, try and convince others, and not get fired. In fact, many people do not want to try and have others convince them of their political leanings.
- Aperocky 7y agoYeah, THIS. Trying to convince other people of MY political leaning goes against one of the central political leaning that I have: Everyone should have freedom to believe in whatever they want to believe in. I also find it annoying when other people try to shove their believe down my throat.
- bcrosby95 7y agoI try to view political discussions as helping to spread information and confront one's own biases. Most people don't seem to though. I've had people that I agree with politically on a subject yell and curse at me because I don't believe every bullshit "fact" they sling my way.
- refurb 7y agoExactly. If I'm working on a team that is rolling out a new Google drive feature, I really don't need to hear you talk about why drinking straws are a phallic symbol and used by the patriarchy to keep woman down. We have work to do.
- gwbas1c 7y agoI wish your comment was top level, because most of the comments in this thread are snarky responses that don't understand how politics turned Google's workplace toxic.
- arcticbull 7y agoI'm sure the oppressed party in your example feels the polar opposite and don't want to hear your whining about how feminism doesn't matter in modern society because it's good enough as is. And I think that's the point :)
- cameronbrown 7y agoI assume you're being sarcastic/exaggerating, but even so. This is just a perfect example of how polarised politics is today. Society just needs to calm down and evaluate itself instead of bickering over nonsense.
- TheGRS 7y agoYes, every meaningful change in society has come to light because everyone calmed down enough.
- cameronbrown 7y agoHow is meaningful change in society related to shipping Google Drive features? Time and a place. Politics has no nuance or filter anymore. It's all the time on full blast, forever. I hate it.
- 7y ago
- SkyBelow 7y agoIt would be up to the details of their individuals contracts. It would be possible for someone's contract to either directly (unlikely) or indirectly (far more likely) allow for debating of politics to some degree. That freedom would be part of their compensation package, though one often not considered in simple models. I think Google is realizing they have undervalued the cost to them of allowing such an action and want to renegotiate. Since it is likely an indirect benefit, this would largely be done by changing corporate rules and culture concerning politics where workers could respond in numerous ways. While it is possible for a contract specifying 8 hours of work without a single thought other than work (and any legally mandated breaks) in exchange for the given salary and benefits, I've never seen any organization that actually operated using such contracts.
- jackcosgrove 7y agoI think there are a lot of reasons someone at work may not be doing work, that have nothing to do with talking about politics. BRB...gotta get to work ;)
- gaze 7y agoYes but what work? Should that work be done? Google just wants everyone to be good little soldiers and do what they’re told.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- im3w1l 7y agoWhen you organize the worlds information, then some amount of politics is a necessary part of the job. The product you are selling is built by political talk. To give a fairly tame example. Lets say someone googles "Can crystal healing cure cancer". Do you put a box saying no? Do you put put a box saying "according to authority it does not". If you defer to authority to do you defer to different one in different countries? What if they disagree? Maybe we need a list of FUBAR countries?
- mc32 7y agoYes, but that should be determined by subject matter experts in policy and politics. For example the issue of who controls the three different areas of “Kashmir” should not be settled by the opinions of college graduates who have little exposure to international politics and policy and or history.
- taneq 7y agoBecause some of them don't agree with the right point of view.... >.>
- 19ylram49 7y agoExactly. I find it quite bizarre when some folks suggest divorcing from politics as if the possibility exists. Everything is political. Even this very conversation is political.
- Koshkin 7y ago> Everything is political. Math is not political.
- fzeroracer 7y agoGoogle's page ranking algorithm can be considered very political despite being essentially just math as you put it.
- izzydata 7y agoYou just aren't trying hard enough.
- magashna 7y agoPro-skub or anti-skub? https://pbfcomics.com/comics/skub/ https://pbfcomics.com/comics/skub/
- izzydata 7y agoWhich are you and what's your favorite color?
- magashna 7y agoAll I need to know is we disagree and I hate you.
- tomatotomato37 7y agoI find the notion that think that you think that its even morally appropriate to have a debate on skub to be absolutely reprehensible and disgusting, and I refuse to engage you further.
- zarkov99 7y agoBecause political discussions are incredibly polarizing, specially these days, and once they are allowed they pulverize the company into factions that cannot work together until the more strident or powerful of these factions takes over and pushes everybody else out or into silence. And when this happens, you have an homogeneous political body as the gatekeeper to the worlds information. What could go wrong?
- sp332 7y agoSo the key to a diverse organization is not talking about politics? Seems unlikely.
- Kalium 7y agoOne of the keys to a diverse organization is to adopt policies and practices that don't strongly encourage uniformity. Political compatibility is one form of uniformity that can work to reduce diversity and inclusion. Perhaps "Handle With Care" might be a wise attitude?
- dantheman 7y agoReally, maybe focus on what you have in common and not what's different -- people have a lot more in common and agree about a lot more things than they realize.
- zarkov99 7y agoIn this day and age, with the gutter level of discourse used daily by politicians? With a media designed to elicit outrage and a populous that has been led to believe that what divides is far more important than what brings us together? Absolutely, at least until the madness goes away.
- concordDance 7y agoThe politicians are a product of the media environment imo. The blame lies in the race to the bottom that happened in news once it got competetive. Until the innoculative meme of having an intuitive understanding of sampling (both of individual incidents and individual aspects of a thing) spreads throughout a decent portion of the populatiob, this awful situation will continue.
- defertoreptar 7y agoIf all the discussion stayed within the confines of the company and away from headlines, and they never generated lawsuits, and HR never had to hear employees complain about how such and such had an argument with such and such, then I doubt anyone would mind. It doesn't matter what the philosophically correct definition of politics is--what matters is reducing HR complaints, lawsuits, and negative headlines.
- dgudkov 7y agoBecause in theory, a debate is a thoughtful discussion where opponents are respectful to opinions of each other and have the common goal of finding the truth. In reality, political debating at workplace quickly becomes just ugly. And for companies like Google it's also costly, because media adore leaked scandals in big corporations.
- bradlys 7y ago> In reality, political debating at workplace quickly becomes just ugly. I don't think it really has to. I debate politics with people at work enough. I won't get into specifics too much but it's not uncommon to meet someone who has a controversial opinion. You talk with someone, find out why they believe what they believe, and then question a few things (mostly asking why they believe they believe - what lead them to their beliefs). It doesn't have to get heated - it can be a boring lecture to one another about why you believe what you believe. It only gets ugly when you do things that won't lead to change like: "No - you're dumb! You should think what I think!" Which I don't think people who are emotionally and socially competent would do that often... That said - I don't think of people at Google (or other big companies) as being particularly emotionally or socially competent because they don't hire and train for that.
- username90 7y agoDo you discuss politics at work in an online forum where 100 000 persons can pitch in? It is very different from discussing politics in person, things gets way more toxic online since there are more people who can take offence so arguments often escalate.
- bradlys 7y agoSure - I get that. I understand with enough people in a semi-anonymous forum that it could get toxic quickly from just a few bad actors. However, a lot of the commentary here has been around in-person interactions and not on an online forum.
- throwaway3563 7y ago
- fromthestart 7y agoBecause Google is not a publisher, and selectively choosing how to present information according to the predominant internal politics is unethical without a disclaimer, which currently does not exist, given Google's status as the defacto gateway to information on the internet. Curating information in such a manner is, ironically, marginalizing the groups who's views are being suppressed. Information should flow freely for people to make their own decisions. This is a dangerous amount of power for an increasingly biased private entity, particularly given certain choice quotes in this article and others regarding googlers' views on the current presidency.