https://www.wired.com/story/trapped-in-silicon-valleys-hidde...
Maybe US Westerners…
it’s just that the managers are deliberately choosing to ignore the issue, because they themselves actually support (or have nothing against) casteism
can’t make a diversity meeting bout that
I first learned about effective altruism when GiveWell did a tech talk.
Also, in 2008, all the major presidential candidates stopped in Mountain View to give a campaign speech. And then there was the time OK Go gave a concert, due to the YouTube connection I presume.
Those were different times. That was mostly before the anti-tech backlash, when Google could seemingly do no wrong.
Even in the early days there were frequently minor controversies, but things got much more fraught by 2015 or so.
The website says, "The world's most influential thinkers, creators, makers and doers all in one place. Talks at Google. Where great minds meet."
The last 5 talks in my feed: - LGBTQ & Spirituality - Neurdiversity: How to Love, Live, and Work Better - A Discussion On His Book "Jews Don't Count" - A Lookback at Japanese Internment & a Storied Writing Career - No One Understands You and What To Do About It
https://talksat.withgoogle.com/
I don't think I've directly answered your questions, but these talks touch on social issues, tech valuations, Mars and space exploration, physical and athletic performance, health and diet, and I guess anything else that Googlers would be interested in hearing about.
Perhaps an alternative idea can be considered: this ontology people have latched onto isn’t accurate and there can be people who don’t know the above answer because indeed they aren’t exposed to a whole lot of social issue talks at work.
Because most of the people in these roles aren't actually well-educated in 'best practices', you get stuff like mandatory non-anonymized surveys that ask whether people are trans and send the results to managers, or slideshows talking about minority representation that omit Asians, Hispanics, and other 'common' groups.
For the more controversial topics, the talks are vetted more carefully, to make sure they align with the political position of the company, and that they don't raise too much opposition from any groups within the company.
The goal of the speaker is to convert as many (preferably influential) people as possible to their viewpoint. The goal of the hosting employee is typically the same, at least for the controversial issues (since those are usually highly politicized). The goal of the host company is to promote themselves as a bastion of certain (good, from their perspective) ideas, and/or as a place for thoughtful discussions.
A pastry chef at a café on the Google Mountain View campus put out some nice little cakes with Tibetan goji berries. The sign said "Free Tibet Goji Berry Cake". This was obviously a sly nod to the Free Tibet campaign, and also true, as the cake was free, this being Google.
Some local Chinese Googlers complained to kitchen management, saying that the idea of freeing Tibet was anti-Chinese. The pastry chef was suspended by the catering company.
The story soon reached the high traffic "misc" mailing list. Many US Googlers objected to the pastry chef being punished for what they considered inoffensive free speech. A fund was started to compensate the cook for lost wages. There was a campaign to reinstate her immediately.
At least one Chinese Googler threatened to quit if the cook was not fired, and was encouraged to go ahead and quit by people who sided with the cook. Some Chinese Googlers shared their interesting opinions about Tibet, e.g. they said the Dalai Lama is a Nazi, he is a secret CIA agent, etc.
This new information was met with skepticism and failed to win anybody over to the Chinese side.
Anyway, eventually the pastry chef was reinstated. I don't think anybody quit. It all blew over.