> Which makes the argument of your initial comment, that the median is not a meaning of "average", again, false. As you note, my point is that "average" is mos

> Which makes the argument of your initial comment, that the median is not a meaning of "average", again, false. As you note, my point is that "average" is most commonly understood as mean. The original article seems to fall prey to the classic mean-vs-median distinction. The compensation numbers being presented do not necessarily represent what one would expect. FAANGs are known to give a small number of employees multi-million-dollar comp packages -- that will skew the average (erm... mean) but not the median.