Google Fires Author of Anti-Diversity Manifesto, CEO Ends Vacation to Deal With Crisis

Google Placeholder
Jeff Chiu/AP/REX/Shutterstock

Google has fired the author of a controversial anti-diversity manifesto that got leaked to the media this weekend after circulating among employees last week, according to multiple reports. CEO Sundar Pichai publicly spoke out against the memo Monday night, and also said that he would cut his family vacation short to deal with the crisis.

Bloomberg was first to get a confirmation for the firing from the affected employee; Google declined to confirm the termination when contacted by Variety.

The ten-page manifesto, titled “Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber,” accused the company of a left-wing political bias that led to the discrimination of male employees under the guise of diversity. Throughout the text, it aimed to defend the idea that women supposedly have inherent biological traits that make it harder for them to succeed in engineering positions at a tech company like Google.

The author went on to stereotype women as more susceptible to “neuroticism,” and suggested that hiring practices that account for diversity would lower the bar, effectively resulting in the hire of less qualified applicants.

Google CEO Sundar Pichai said in a memo sent to staff Monday night that he valued critical discussions of Google’s diversity programs, but added that some of the accusations made in the memo were clearly harmful to other employees.

“We strongly support the right of Googlers to express themselves, and much of what was in that memo is fair to debate, regardless of whether a vast majority of Googlers disagree with it. However, portions of the memo violate our Code of Conduct and cross the line by advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace,” he wrote in the memo, which the company published on its blog. “To suggest a group of our colleagues have traits that make them less biologically suited to that work is offensive and not OK.”

Pichai had been spending time in Africa and Europe recently, and had started his family vacation overseas this week. But in light of the controversy, he decided to return to the office early.

“The past few days have been very difficult for many at the company, and we need to find a way to debate issues on which we might disagree,” he wrote. “There’s a lot more to discuss as a group—including how we create a more inclusive environment for all.

Filed Under:

Want to read more articles like this one? SUBSCRIBE TO VARIETY TODAY.
Post A Comment 24

Leave a Reply


Comments are moderated. They may be edited for clarity and reprinting in whole or in part in Variety publications.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

  1. lpasqualis says:

    The author of the manifest devolved in a comedy of errors.
    You can read a strange rhetoric:

    > Differences in distributions of traits between men and women may in
    > part explain why we don’t have 50% representation of women in tech
    > and leadership. Discrimination to reach equal representation is unfair,
    > divisive, and bad for business.

    He claims that the goal is to reach equal representation? That is misguided. Diversity programs at Google are aimed to create favorable environments to allow skilled female engineers to thrive. Google does not claim that 50% representation of women in tech needs to be reached.

    He continues by falling into the gender bias and politics correlation.

    > At Google, we talk so much about unconscious bias as it applies to race and
    > gender, but we rarely discuss our moral biases. Political orientation is actually
    > a result of deep moral preferences and thus biases. Considering that the
    > overwhelming majority of the social sciences, media, and Google lean left, we
    > should critically examine these prejudices.

    Painful to read, very misguide and showing a lack of good judgment.

    • AMaskedMan says:

      “Google does not claim that 50% representation of women in tech needs to be reached.”

      Yet, even if 50/50 is reached, the tech world will still be considered a racist, sexist, patriarchy. I think you are the who is “delving into a comedy of errors”. You are cherry picking a couple paragraphs and then making false contextual claims. His assertion is that differences between men and women explain some of the gap. Are you agreeing? If so, then are you saying Googles push for “diversity” is a program in search of a problem?

      BTW, this is not unique to google. The anti-science pablum spewing out of the Humanities has poisoned everything.

      10 pages, you have 1 paragraph you tried to refute, another you just posted with no rebuttal.

      Is that the best you have?

      • TJCooper says:

        I expect you to make a mature point, citing some science or something.

      • AMaskedMan says:

        I expect you to have more than rhetoric. Seriously, your post is basically “I think hes stupid”. LOL. Thats it, and yet you think its worthy of being shared. LOL. Someone is a narcissist.

      • lpasqualis says:

        10 pages of absurdities with no base, from a kid with no life experience. Do you expect me to comment on 3000 words in a comment on this post? LOl. Is that your best argument?.

  2. Jazz says:

    I’m not sure why his manifesto is being called “anti-diversity”. Did any of these reporters actually read it? He states several times that he supports diversity but believe his company may be going about it the wrong way. He makes extremely good points and backs each up with citation (more than can be said for more reporters these days). I thought it was an excellent article and will encourage my employees to read it as well.

    • AMaskedMan says:

      No they didn’t read it. The MSM portrays it as attacking a sacred value, and so they rise up to defend it with righteous zeal (yes, the left has turned into a religion).

  3. heyitsron says:

    WHY does this article repeatedly refer to the dude as “the author” and “disaffected employee?” The dude is James Damore who studied two years towards a PhD in systems biology at Harvard University. So we thinks he must know something about which he writes. None are so deaf as those who do not choose to listen. Right, Sundar?

    • AMaskedMan says:

      All the science is on Damore’s side. That’s why those attacking him don’t refute the science, or mischaracterize it (neuroticism becomes an insult not a personality trait).

      These people are worse than vaccine deniers or climate change deniers.

  4. 1Ronald says:

    “We strongly support the right of Googlers to express themselves, and much of what was in that memo is fair to debate, regardless of whether a vast majority of Googlers disagree with it.” Yeah, right. But, Pichy, you fired him any way. How about that? And probably with a clear conscience. Or a scared one.
    The late writer, Florence King, once penned a tome on statements that contradicted actions. As in “I won’t say that’s wrong, but………(you’re fired). Not a Sundar Day at Google. Not at all. Much rain in the forecast. So the rest of you folks at Google, what did you learn from this? Keep Your Mouth Shut. And keep telling the Emperor how nice he looks. How sweet he is. And no you didn’t eat a burger or that steak last night. And get that resume, your resume, updated and work on it, that getting out of there, nonstop until the cows come home. It’ time for you who care about yourselves your careers to MOOOOOOOVE on. Will they let you take one of those neat multi-color paint job bicycle with you?

  5. lex6819 says:

    There was a time when women couldn’t become doctors. They were considered unfit for many of the reasons the manifesto leveled at women in engineering. As of 2016 women enrolling in medical school has reached a 10-year high. How many doctors do you know are women? A very sizeable percentage. No one argues that women can’t practice medicine anymore. Why is this even an issue in engineering? Is software development more technical than surgery? Really? I don’t think so.

    • AMaskedMan says:

      Do you know that Norway has been trying to create a “diverse” society for about 70 years. They have an entire department devoted to erasing any gender differences in society. Gues what?

      10% of nurses are men
      5% of engineers are women

      In the field of medicine, women chose family medicine more than men. Men chose specialized medicine more than women.

      Evolution didn’t stop at the shoulders.

    • Jazz says:

      Have you read his article? He never states that women are “unfit” to be software engineers. He simply states that women and men (on average) have biological and psychological differences that make engineering software more appealing to men and less appealing to women. In his article he even gives suggestions on ways to make the job more appealing to women so that they can thrive rather than just hiring a certain quote for diversity sake. You should read his article it’s very good.

  6. Eric says:

    So this guy gets FIRED, for stating what everyone knows is true? I worked over 40 years in various technical fields, including stints as machinist, aeronautical engineer, nuclear engineer, government security, IT and others. Over the years it became bloody obvious that women (with some wonderful exceptions) are not as competent as men in technical areas. Even worse, most of them really don’t care about technical issues and would get out if they could. Men understand this, even the most politically correct managers. I know because I’ve spoken with many of them in private. They’re not stupid, they’re just willing to lie in order to protect their jobs and relationships.

    CEO Sundar Pichai lies when he says that he values critical discussions of Google’s diversity programs. He’s actually deathly afraid of honest public critical discussions because the consequences can be devastating to those who speak the truth. I don’t blame him, the Marxist SJW values that dominate the modern world have forced him to fire a valuable employee for simply speaking his mind. If Mr. Pichai didn’t fine this guy, he would probably have been fired himself. That’s how deep this rotten illness runs. It’s also typical of the Communist mentality; never forgive, never forget.

    The SJW PC illness runs counter to all traditional American values. When I was a kid, all Americans understood that the freedom to speak your opinion was sacred; it’s one of the most important reasons people left oppressive European regimes and came here. The term is Freedom of Speech. It’s so important that they put it first in the Bill of Rights. Nowadays, thanks to these Cultural Marxist SJW values, you’re supposed to go along with lies just to avoid hurting somebody’s feelings, and screw the truth. Well, what about the pain of being forced to tell a lie? How come these moral-high-horse SJWs don’t address that? Why is the other person’s pain more important? Why does a man have to be FIRED for speaking the truth, just because women feel insulted?

    • AMaskedMan says:

      Well said. We as a society have surrneded to an science denying cult (PC) and the humanities are producing these zealots.

  7. tvlover44 says:

    any obstacles to women succeeding in any STEM fields have to do with culture, socialization, and structural issues — not at all with ‘inherent biological differences’. to claim otherwise, as the two commenters before me have done, is completely sexist and ignorant.

    • AMaskedMan says:

      You say that as if you can back it up. You cant, you might as well cited a bible verse. The science is not your side, and it has NEVER been. Evolution didn’t stop at the shoulders, it did in fact impact the most expensive organ in the body (the brain). Your belief is no different than claiming culture, socialization, and structural issues prevent women from competing with men in basketball.

      Watch “brainwash” by Harald Eia.

    • Scared Of The Truth says:

      Nowhere does he say women can’t succeed due to their biology. What he says is biology plays a role in those women being less inclined to enter those fields. That’s a big and very important difference.

    • Did you even read my comment? Evolutionary psychology is not something you can just brush under the rug because it seems sexist to you. I also just said the memo was against sexism and racism and outright stated as much. To call someone who clearly isn’t sexist, sexist, is more a reflection of you than them.

  8. Here is a solid summary of this article: “I did not read the memo.” The man spoke out against sexism and racism. Are we going to just paint any observations about a group as stereotyping now? Women are inclined to be feminine; there I just ‘stereotyped’ women come write an article about me Variety I’m sure it couldn’t be as airheaded as this one.

    And that statement on inherent biological traits in this article, is an outright lie. The author of the Google memo mentioned evolutionary psychology. He states women have evolved psychological traits that do not favor interest in technology and that is why there are naturally lower numbers of women in the tech industry -that is all the ‘biology’ mentioned in the paper. What a load Variety. Hopefully other people don’t also for a brief moment mistake this place as a news source.

  9. love seeing google in turmoil says:

    Has anybody ever thought that maybe the vast majority of women don’t want to sit in front of a computer screen and write computer instructions all day long? It makes me laugh that we are told that women are more likely than men to be team players, and more collaborative, and get along better, and blah blah blah, as long as it is seen as positive to women. But turn that around and say, well maybe there is something women aren’t as good at … that person must be removed and silenced. Remember The president of Harvard? Was it Larry Summers?

    • AMaskedMan says:

      Agreed, we are entering a dangerous period were women believe they are PERFECT. Men are told repeatedly to control their negative aspects (violence, typically). Women are told they are perfect. The truth is, they are not. They tend to protect way to much, and seek to eliminate all harm and offense.

      We are in a feminist era, and I think we will long for the day of old white men as our liberties are sacrificed for safety and tranquility.

    • ali says:

      As a programmer, I can say the job is one stuffed with boredom, tedium and often depressingly difficult problems that are almost always solved under great pressure. And that’s to say nothing of the open-ended and inconvenient demands on one’s time.

      The pay is excellent – no doubt – but the key point is that many men are willing to live that life expressly so that their current/future partners don’t have to, and so that their children might have a mother or parent more present in their lives than the US’s current two-salary lifestyle often demands.

      That’s an asymmetry that is reflected in who goes for these jobs, who pushes themselves for promotion and who makes the sacrifices that would make them eligible for promotion in the first place. It’s in some ways division of labor, merely – and to turn it into some social fiction makes a mockery of the rational choices people make for the very purest of reasons.

      • AMaskedMan says:

        There is a problem with your post. You portray men as people willing to sacrifice for their family.

        That is not allowed in the new PC age. First off, you cant mention family, unless its a gay couple with kids. Secondly, men cannot be portrayed in a positive light under any circumstances.

More Digital News from Variety