4 ms·

> By about half way down they gave up all pretence and started arguing that Pao's case was valid/accurate even if the jury disagreed. where?

• Someone1234 12y ago
  About half way down and beyond.
  • anigbrowl 12y ago
    Listing someone's claims is not the same as an endorsement of them. I find the article quite neutral and well-written. Writers cannot and should not speculate on why a jury may have decided claims were deficient because juries don't supply justifications for their verdicts, although jurors may choose to give interviews afterwards.
    • Someone1234 12y ago
      > I find the article quite neutral and well-written. Sorry but this is not neutral: > Most were heavily disputed by the defense, but they nevertheless served to define Kleiner as having refused to evolve since it was formed in the early 1970s. So she claimed one thing, the defence claimed another, but the author thinks "Kleiner [.] refused to evolve since it was formed in the early 1970s." The article spends a great deal of time talking about her accusations, but absolutely no time talking about their accusations towards her. It doesn't even try to qualify her accusations, and they're stated as near facts (which is ludicrous given the jury decision). Essentially the article has taken a side. The whole third of the article is dedicated to "women in SV" and how they're discriminated against. Hard to call that neutral given the subject matter, it hardly reads like something which could be supportive of Kleiner for example. Look, I can totally understand if people agree with the article. I cannot understand how anyone could call the article neutral or balanced. It simply is not. It has a side/agenda/bias, regardless of where you stand on the issue.
      • andylei 12y ago
        The article: > The suit and the trial introduced a number of colorful phrases that were said to have been uttered to or about Ms. Pao. Most were heavily disputed by the defense, but they nevertheless served to define Kleiner as having refused to evolve since it was formed in the early 1970s. The second sentence is a statement about the phrases that Ms. Paro alleges were uttered by employees of Kleiner Perkins. It is not a statement about Kleiner Perkins.
        • sukilot 12y ago
          It's bad writing. "Nevertheless" implies that someone chose a winning argument, and the weasely writing doesn't say who.
      • anigbrowl 12y ago
        The thing is that accusations towards her are meaningless, insofar as KP didn't launch a counter-suit. Nor should you read the jury decision as meaning her allegations were not factual; a jury may agree with the factual allegations but not that they were evidence of systematic discrimination. One could, for example, feel sympathetic to Pao but think that her managers were merely bumbling fools rather than deliberately promulgating a sexist policy. As for the writer's bias, consider another extract from elsewhere in the article: Ms. Pao is married to Alphonse Fletcher Jr., a Wall Street financier whose hedge fund is bankrupt. Pension funds are suing to recover their money amid accusations of fraud. There's no presentation of Fletcher's position at all, but I don't infer from that that the author considers him a fraudster. Pointing out that it's raining doesn't mean you desire people to get wet.