4 ms·

Google's workforce is 53.1% white, and 36.3% Asian (so, not far). 2.5% is black. Their marketing graphics - to put it charitably - bely those demographics. src

by samhw 4y ago

Google's workforce is 53.1% white, and 36.3% Asian (so, not far). 2.5% is black. Their marketing graphics - to put it charitably - bely those demographics. src="https://static.googleusercontent.com/media/diversity.google/en//static/pdf/Google_Diversity_annual_report_2018.pdf https://static.googleusercontent.com/media/diversity.google/..." />

umeshunni 4y ago
Those demographics are US-only.
- samhw 4y ago
  Indeed, as are the graphics we're discussing.
burkaman 4y ago
If you're looking for photos of employees, you should look around their careers site. There are plenty of white people there: https://careers.google.com/locations/seattle-kirkland-bellevue-redmond/ https://careers.google.com/locations/seattle-kirkland-bellev... The rest of their marketing is not made up of employee photos, though. We would expect it to roughly reflect their target audience, and it does. > to put it charitably To put what charitably? What are we even talking about? I don't understand this conversation.
- samhw 4y ago
  Ah, sorry for the late response. Respectfully, I think it's a bit dishonest that you've linked to one very specific subpage for one specific office in Seattle, presumably the one page you found which contained a lot of white people. I'm not sure if I even need to write any more, because the fact that you needed to do that demonstrates my point probably better than I can. But, to say the obvious, have a look at their root careers page (I think that's a good "nothing-up-my-sleeve URL", so to speak): https://careers.google.com https://careers.google.com > To put what charitably? Well, the phrase immediately surrounding that one in my comment: "their marketing graphics bely those [i.e. 53%-white] demographics". (To be clear, I don't say this with any racist intent. I'm just allergic to insincerity. Whatever one's political commitments, it's plain – to anyone who hasn't completely subordinated their critical faculties to some or other ideological dogma – that Google's photos make great play of their few minority ethnic staff, more than would an equally-large set of random samples from their 53%-white staff. It reminds me of my sister (who's mixed-race, as I am) being summoned whenever her china-white private girls' school was taking photos. My own - hers was our sister school - mustn't've deemed me sufficiently dark..)

by samhw 4y ago

umeshunni 4y ago

Those demographics are US-only.

samhw 4y ago
Indeed, as are the graphics we're discussing.

burkaman 4y ago

If you're looking for photos of employees, you should look around their careers site. There are plenty of white people there: https://careers.google.com/locations/seattle-kirkland-bellevue-redmond/ https://careers.google.com/locations/seattle-kirkland-bellev... The rest of their marketing is not made up of employee photos, though. We would expect it to roughly reflect their target audience, and it does. > to put it charitably To put what charitably? What are we even talking about? I don't understand this conversation.

samhw 4y ago
Ah, sorry for the late response. Respectfully, I think it's a bit dishonest that you've linked to one very specific subpage for one specific office in Seattle, presumably the one page you found which contained a lot of white people. I'm not sure if I even need to write any more, because the fact that you needed to do that demonstrates my point probably better than I can. But, to say the obvious, have a look at their root careers page (I think that's a good "nothing-up-my-sleeve URL", so to speak): https://careers.google.com https://careers.google.com > To put what charitably? Well, the phrase immediately surrounding that one in my comment: "their marketing graphics bely those [i.e. 53%-white] demographics". (To be clear, I don't say this with any racist intent. I'm just allergic to insincerity. Whatever one's political commitments, it's plain – to anyone who hasn't completely subordinated their critical faculties to some or other ideological dogma – that Google's photos make great play of their few minority ethnic staff, more than would an equally-large set of random samples from their 53%-white staff. It reminds me of my sister (who's mixed-race, as I am) being summoned whenever her china-white private girls' school was taking photos. My own - hers was our sister school - mustn't've deemed me sufficiently dark..)