10 ms·

So this is a video production department, which is kind of amazing when you think about it. The aesthetic of the modern corporate/tech video is cultish in chara

So this is a video production department, which is kind of amazing when you think about it. The aesthetic of the modern corporate/tech video is cultish in character and it would make sense that these people know how to do this. And then it’s also interesting because one could assume that these people could do so because the actual engineers in Alphabet probably aren’t all that focused or interacting with this video team more than necessary. And they don’t know much about video production anyways, not enough to scrutinize hiring decisions. This sounds like something that will take a little more organized effort to stamp out, probably internal investigation, evidence gathering etc. But if this guy figured it out, they didn’t cover their tracks very well anyways ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

AceJohnny2 4y ago
> they didn’t cover their tracks very well anyways ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I mean they actually told him where they were from (geographically, if not organizationally), so clearly they didn't consider it something that needed to be secret. Which is interesting, because it gives us insight into their way of thinking [1]. They clearly don't consider themselves to be in any way toxic like the author thinks they are. Cults are interesting: they provide a sense of belonging and accomplishment to their members, in exchange for something (time, money/tithe, ...). In that respect, they're just another point on the spectrum of human social groups. Including some corporations. Frankly, I (and clearly other commenters here) have difficulty finding a clear ontological distinction between such a cult and, well, the Google corporation itself. [1] I'm already Othering them, which I'm sure they'd be surprised about
- swatcoder 4y ago
  The satanic and brainwashing/deprogramming scares of the 80’s changed the way a lot of people use the word, but for the preceding several millennia cult simply suggested: A membership community with secrets and opportunities reserved for members. There are millions of these around us, and we’re all probably members of several. It seems to be pretty normal throughout history. We just don’t acknowledge it as such because the word was only fairly recently stigmatized.
  - nonrandomstring 4y ago
    Yes, I think in this context the word "cult" is inappropriate. The word the author was looking for is "clique".
    - happyopossum 4y ago
      Umm, members of cliques don't ritually abuse each other - that's a cult thing.
      - nonrandomstring 4y ago
        Okay, more nuance: The shit this "Fellowship of Friends" actually does - that's a cult. I guess wanted to say they're a clique of cult members. The cult is real. The clique is the group within Google (as opposed to there being a cult within Google), I hope that distinction makes sense. I've seen this before. At the BBC. Everyone closed ranks around Jimmy Savile and an organisation called PIE (paedophile information exchange). You were literally told you couldn't say anything about it. But AFAIK the rotten group was small, but powerful. Many, many more decent people work at the BBC. As I'm sure applies to Google. Edit: I say this because the headline "Cult within Google" is misleading. (I bloody hate Google and everything they stand for - but there's an important distinction to be made)
  - dendriti 4y ago
    We call non-religious cults "cliques" now...
  - dcow 4y ago
    Costco: a modern cult.
    - jonathankoren 4y ago
      Partake in the Holy Communion of the Perpetual $1.50 Hot Dog Combo.
      - 4y ago
- wardedVibe 4y ago
  Jesus Christ dude, they're led by a man who routinely sexually assaults people. Being permissive about that is pretty damning. Kooky beliefs are one thing, but cults combine those with oppressive social structures. It's not that hard unless you're stuck in the middle of one with all it's filtering.
  - pavlov 4y ago
    So, like Tesla and SpaceX.
    - thedailymail 4y ago
      Actually interested - are there multiple allegations against EM other than the recently reported horse-for-handjob offer?
      - TheOtherHobbes 4y ago
        Only one accusation: https://www.dailyadvent.com/news/45a9223a5a878bd90c386109e556ed95-Worlds-Richest-Man-Elon-Musk-Faces-Rape-Allegations-In-Lawsuit-Report https://www.dailyadvent.com/news/45a9223a5a878bd90c386109e55... There are also consistent allegations of an abusive culture at both SpaceX and Tesla: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jul/05/tesla-sexual-harassment-discrimination-engineer-fired https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jul/05/tesla-sex... https://www.businessinsider.com/former-spacex-engineer-intern-sexual-harassment-allegations-criticizes-elon-musk-2021-12 https://www.businessinsider.com/former-spacex-engineer-inter... https://www.theverge.com/2021/12/14/22835181/tesla-lawsuit-sexual-harassment-six-women https://www.theverge.com/2021/12/14/22835181/tesla-lawsuit-s...
  - permo-w 4y ago
    How different is a cult from a corporation, really?
    - tomrod 4y ago
      Having recovered from a high demand religion (which can be considered a modern cult depending on the definition), cults are very different from corporations. I feel like the best definition of a cult is any group that won't let you dissociate with your dignity intact. Most corporations are fine with that. Some aren't. So this suggests substantial differences.
- turdit 4y ago
  “…they didn't consider it something that needed to be secret… They clearly don't consider themselves to be in any way toxic like the author thinks they are.” so if a guy says “I’m going to rape you” it means he doesn’t think his behavior is toxic? because he’s open about it? brilliant logic
7952 4y ago
Obviously it is wrong to influence hiring/firing or purchasing decisions. But do you think there are grounds for removing cults in a general sense from a company? Surely it is an aspect of people private lives in the same way that religion is.
- behringer 4y ago
  Nepotism and special vendor contracts are most definitely negatives to google business. On top of that they're losing access to good talent.
- atty 4y ago
  Any sane company does not want to be related to an organization where grooming, sex trafficking and rape are encouraged and practiced, I would think. That seems like more than enough reason to me.
- bombcar 4y ago
  Companies don't like alternate or parallel authority structures inside the organization. This is why there are anti-fraternization rules, for example, because it can be abused.
- permo-w 4y ago
  you wouldn't want another competing company operating within your company, would you? cults are pretty much corporations that aren't ashamed of their authoritarianism, with a few religious themes sprinkled in
behringer 4y ago
This explains so much about google
- lofatdairy 4y ago
  Not really... I love to bash Google as much as anyone but a religious cult within a department within a massive corporation doesn't really mean much about the company as a whole. Especially when you could pretty clearly see the difference between cult's teachings and the public stances for women's rights and for same-sex marriages that many Google employees have taken.
  - cs137 4y ago
    A modern religious ethnographer would distinguish between NRMs (new religious movements) and the minority thereof that are actually criminal, coercive, etc., as the term "cult" has come to imply. That said, NRMs aren't always free of toxicity. Pyramid schemes and actual cults often target them, exploiting a high-trust network of people considered to be gullible. The typical corporate "cult"--I don't think Google is any more or less toxic than any other company at this point, and the true cult is capitalism itself, not a specific company--is somewhere between NRMs and actual cults in terms of virulence. Companies have displaced communities in modern life and yet they frequently un-person people for economic or petty political reasons. That said, executives usually prefer to keep their child sex abuse and their economic exploitation in different buildings--and, if Epstein is any indicator, on different landmasses--so, there's that, at least.
    - CryptoPunk 4y ago
      [dead]
    - lofatdairy 4y ago
      Excuse me if I'm mistaken, but it seems to me that the FoF falls under the more pejorative sense of cult, rather than NRM, given the central role of leadership and the abuses of power. It seems distinct from, say, neo-paganism in that sense. If you're referring to the parent comment's description of Google, then there's really no point in trying to make a distinction, since they were using it as a polemic anyways. That said, I don't think describing capitalism as the cult is necessarily useful either, in that it implies a reliance on _active_ belief and conscious performance of rituals which doesn't seem to be the case. It seems to me that the more useful framework is Fisher's capitalist realism, which more accurately describes this neoliberal end of history that inspires so much pessimism (and a more Foucaultian sense of power which is pervasive and defines the discursive space, rather than religious, which identifies a moral power within entities). Regardless, theorizing endlessly on capitalism is probably not going to solve actual issues of corporate overreach and abuses of power, so it's infinitely easier to just call Google a cult and hope it shifts public opinion and motivates political action lmao.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

AceJohnny2 4y ago

> they didn’t cover their tracks very well anyways ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I mean they actually told him where they were from (geographically, if not organizationally), so clearly they didn't consider it something that needed to be secret. Which is interesting, because it gives us insight into their way of thinking [1]. They clearly don't consider themselves to be in any way toxic like the author thinks they are. Cults are interesting: they provide a sense of belonging and accomplishment to their members, in exchange for something (time, money/tithe, ...). In that respect, they're just another point on the spectrum of human social groups. Including some corporations. Frankly, I (and clearly other commenters here) have difficulty finding a clear ontological distinction between such a cult and, well, the Google corporation itself. [1] I'm already Othering them, which I'm sure they'd be surprised about

swatcoder 4y ago
The satanic and brainwashing/deprogramming scares of the 80’s changed the way a lot of people use the word, but for the preceding several millennia cult simply suggested: A membership community with secrets and opportunities reserved for members. There are millions of these around us, and we’re all probably members of several. It seems to be pretty normal throughout history. We just don’t acknowledge it as such because the word was only fairly recently stigmatized.
- nonrandomstring 4y ago
  Yes, I think in this context the word "cult" is inappropriate. The word the author was looking for is "clique".
  - happyopossum 4y ago
    Umm, members of cliques don't ritually abuse each other - that's a cult thing.
    - nonrandomstring 4y ago
      Okay, more nuance: The shit this "Fellowship of Friends" actually does - that's a cult. I guess wanted to say they're a clique of cult members. The cult is real. The clique is the group within Google (as opposed to there being a cult within Google), I hope that distinction makes sense. I've seen this before. At the BBC. Everyone closed ranks around Jimmy Savile and an organisation called PIE (paedophile information exchange). You were literally told you couldn't say anything about it. But AFAIK the rotten group was small, but powerful. Many, many more decent people work at the BBC. As I'm sure applies to Google. Edit: I say this because the headline "Cult within Google" is misleading. (I bloody hate Google and everything they stand for - but there's an important distinction to be made)
- dendriti 4y ago
  We call non-religious cults "cliques" now...
- dcow 4y ago
  Costco: a modern cult.
  - jonathankoren 4y ago
    Partake in the Holy Communion of the Perpetual $1.50 Hot Dog Combo.
    - 4y ago
wardedVibe 4y ago
Jesus Christ dude, they're led by a man who routinely sexually assaults people. Being permissive about that is pretty damning. Kooky beliefs are one thing, but cults combine those with oppressive social structures. It's not that hard unless you're stuck in the middle of one with all it's filtering.
- pavlov 4y ago
  So, like Tesla and SpaceX.
  - thedailymail 4y ago
    Actually interested - are there multiple allegations against EM other than the recently reported horse-for-handjob offer?
    - TheOtherHobbes 4y ago
      Only one accusation: https://www.dailyadvent.com/news/45a9223a5a878bd90c386109e556ed95-Worlds-Richest-Man-Elon-Musk-Faces-Rape-Allegations-In-Lawsuit-Report https://www.dailyadvent.com/news/45a9223a5a878bd90c386109e55... There are also consistent allegations of an abusive culture at both SpaceX and Tesla: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jul/05/tesla-sexual-harassment-discrimination-engineer-fired https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jul/05/tesla-sex... https://www.businessinsider.com/former-spacex-engineer-intern-sexual-harassment-allegations-criticizes-elon-musk-2021-12 https://www.businessinsider.com/former-spacex-engineer-inter... https://www.theverge.com/2021/12/14/22835181/tesla-lawsuit-sexual-harassment-six-women https://www.theverge.com/2021/12/14/22835181/tesla-lawsuit-s...
- permo-w 4y ago
  How different is a cult from a corporation, really?
  - tomrod 4y ago
    Having recovered from a high demand religion (which can be considered a modern cult depending on the definition), cults are very different from corporations. I feel like the best definition of a cult is any group that won't let you dissociate with your dignity intact. Most corporations are fine with that. Some aren't. So this suggests substantial differences.
turdit 4y ago
“…they didn't consider it something that needed to be secret… They clearly don't consider themselves to be in any way toxic like the author thinks they are.” so if a guy says “I’m going to rape you” it means he doesn’t think his behavior is toxic? because he’s open about it? brilliant logic

7952 4y ago

Obviously it is wrong to influence hiring/firing or purchasing decisions. But do you think there are grounds for removing cults in a general sense from a company? Surely it is an aspect of people private lives in the same way that religion is.

behringer 4y ago
Nepotism and special vendor contracts are most definitely negatives to google business. On top of that they're losing access to good talent.
atty 4y ago
Any sane company does not want to be related to an organization where grooming, sex trafficking and rape are encouraged and practiced, I would think. That seems like more than enough reason to me.
bombcar 4y ago
Companies don't like alternate or parallel authority structures inside the organization. This is why there are anti-fraternization rules, for example, because it can be abused.
permo-w 4y ago
you wouldn't want another competing company operating within your company, would you? cults are pretty much corporations that aren't ashamed of their authoritarianism, with a few religious themes sprinkled in

behringer 4y ago

This explains so much about google

lofatdairy 4y ago
Not really... I love to bash Google as much as anyone but a religious cult within a department within a massive corporation doesn't really mean much about the company as a whole. Especially when you could pretty clearly see the difference between cult's teachings and the public stances for women's rights and for same-sex marriages that many Google employees have taken.
- cs137 4y ago
  A modern religious ethnographer would distinguish between NRMs (new religious movements) and the minority thereof that are actually criminal, coercive, etc., as the term "cult" has come to imply. That said, NRMs aren't always free of toxicity. Pyramid schemes and actual cults often target them, exploiting a high-trust network of people considered to be gullible. The typical corporate "cult"--I don't think Google is any more or less toxic than any other company at this point, and the true cult is capitalism itself, not a specific company--is somewhere between NRMs and actual cults in terms of virulence. Companies have displaced communities in modern life and yet they frequently un-person people for economic or petty political reasons. That said, executives usually prefer to keep their child sex abuse and their economic exploitation in different buildings--and, if Epstein is any indicator, on different landmasses--so, there's that, at least.
  - CryptoPunk 4y ago
    [dead]
  - lofatdairy 4y ago
    Excuse me if I'm mistaken, but it seems to me that the FoF falls under the more pejorative sense of cult, rather than NRM, given the central role of leadership and the abuses of power. It seems distinct from, say, neo-paganism in that sense. If you're referring to the parent comment's description of Google, then there's really no point in trying to make a distinction, since they were using it as a polemic anyways. That said, I don't think describing capitalism as the cult is necessarily useful either, in that it implies a reliance on _active_ belief and conscious performance of rituals which doesn't seem to be the case. It seems to me that the more useful framework is Fisher's capitalist realism, which more accurately describes this neoliberal end of history that inspires so much pessimism (and a more Foucaultian sense of power which is pervasive and defines the discursive space, rather than religious, which identifies a moral power within entities). Regardless, theorizing endlessly on capitalism is probably not going to solve actual issues of corporate overreach and abuses of power, so it's infinitely easier to just call Google a cult and hope it shifts public opinion and motivates political action lmao.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]