3 ms·
They both had impeccable images and were admired universally but both images were a carefully curated facade. Not sure what them being women have to do with an
by atonse 4y ago
They both had impeccable images and were admired universally but both images were a carefully curated facade.
Not sure what them being women have to do with anything I said. Please let’s not speculate.
Edit: I’m not able to find the Article from a few years ago that detailed Sandberg’s “real” personality. But I was shocked because I’ve always greatly admired her.
- worik 4y agoIt is all the examples have in common: Being women. That is all. Questionably relevant.
- atonse 4y agoIn the case of Elizabeth Holmes, I do actually feel the media played down the role of her partner in crime at Theranos, Sunny Balwani (a man) in all the fraud. Also in the case of Holmes there wasn't anything there. It was all fraud. In the case of Sandberg, no doubt she's a supremely capable executive. But her image in the media was carefully curated by a PR campaign and totally not true, according to that article I frustratingly can't find now. I am only talking about their public image, not what their jobs were.