Google Made a Mistake

One of the bigger societal debates we are facing right now is censorship versus free speech and the limits of free speech and whether censorship is a suppression of free speech. This debate became a subject of national controversy following incidents like the one at UC Berkeley when Milo Yiannopoulos (an alt-right figure/activist) was unable to speak after a series of protests and then riots against his event. Similar events like this have occurred with other alt-right figures such as Richard Spencer who won a court battle after being blocked from speaking at Auburn University earlier this year and was able to speak. However, his ability to speak was handicapped as he fought multiple interruptions throughout his speech and Q+A.

            In my opinion, I think Milo and Spencer are ridiculous and say a lot of what they say just to start controversy and troll. But, suppressing their ability to speak only makes them more popular and controversial and is censorship. The best way to combat their attention-seeking attacks are to simply boycott their events and not call for them to be silenced. A lot of people attending these events are there to oppose and try to start conflict. If those people didn�t show up and instead boycotted, the audience would become much smaller and the speaker wouldn�t have anything to complain about since their rights to freedom of speech were not being violated. Eventually the movement that this figure was trying to start would fall apart because only a small amount of people would follow somebody like Richard Spencer that says stuff like, �At the end of the day, America belongs to white men.�

            I bring this subject up because of a situation happening at Google right now where an engineer by the name of James Damore was fired by the company after publishing a memo that criticized Google�s initiative to diversify their upper level staff. He made his argument by trying to explain that women and men are different biologically so they fit different positions and trying to diversify the upper level staff just to be able to say that your company is diverse is unproductive and hindering to the company as a whole. He argued that men are more suited for leadership and coding jobs while women are more suited for social and artistic jobs.

            He also criticized Google for having a �left-leaning bias� that inhibits a truly diverse range of ideologies. He claimed, �When it comes to diversity and inclusion, Google�s left bias has created a politically correct monoculture that maintains its hold by shaming dissenters into silence.�

            Now do I agree with Damore�s complaints about Google�s diversity policy? No. Do I believe that Google has a left-leaning bias that silences conservative viewpoints? Yes. And I say yes because I am somewhat of a liberal living in a somewhat rural part of South Carolina where not many people are on my side. And sometimes keeping your mouth shut and not causing a debate where people can become quite hostile and angry is easier than giving my input on an issue. So, I do agree with him on that particular issue.

            Do I support Damore�s termination? No. That was exactly what I would not have done. By firing this engineer, you validate his claim that Google silences any differing opinions and you penalize him for exercising his right to free speech. His memo was not caustic or intentionally offensive. Even though I don�t agree with most of his memo, he was raising an honest issue that he had and offered solutions in a respectable manner. By firing Damore, Google is lying to itself when it says that it has an inclusive workplace.

            Damore has recently filed a labor complaint against his treatment from Google and Julian Assange (the infamous founder of Wikileaks) has offered him employment and said that, �Censorship is for losers.� I�m not a big fan of Assange, but I agree with him on this one. Let people speak freely without fear of consequence. That�s all for this week.