The cherry picking of this article is extreme. A company chooses to not employ someone based on a multiple page essay and this article takes a sentence and tries to make it look ridiculous.
What else from that essay was grevious enough to fire him?
The whole thing made a textbook hostile workplace. He said the people around him only got their jobs because of their race or gender and were therefore incompetent.
It's pretty clear you didn't actually read it. I didn't at first either because I trusted the sources I was reading to give me a fair summary. That was a mistake. I didn't necessarily agree with what he said, but it was nowhere near as bad as what 90% of sources were reporting.
I read it and I think it was just as bad as people said. It just happened to be stated in friendly, neutral-sounding language.
You should actually read the multi-page article. And not the version hacked apart by tech "journalists" to remove the citations.
Citations are worthless when the reasoning that is citing them is shoddy. If you cite things, it makes the facts that you're referencing true. It doesn't make the logic of your argument true.
Obviously it's appropriate to remove the citations from someone's work then, right? No bias there :^)