Sounds a whole lot like "don't pay attention to the 90 million we just payed out to someone important who commited sexual harassment, look at these 48 unimportant people we fired without severance...
Sounds a whole lot like "don't pay attention to the 90 million we just payed out to someone important who commited sexual harassment, look at these 48 unimportant people we fired without severance for doing the same thing". Deflect and distract, the best way to get the conversation off of the real story.
Though I understand the sentiment you're going for, the removal of 48 people committing sexual harassment in the workplace is a positive regardless of "importance".
Though I understand the sentiment you're going for, the removal of 48 people committing sexual harassment in the workplace is a positive regardless of "importance".
Oh definitely totally positive and super important but it's being used to try to get people to gloss over an arguably more important story, that is the one that got away without any reprocussions....
Oh definitely totally positive and super important but it's being used to try to get people to gloss over an arguably more important story, that is the one that got away without any reprocussions. What they did to 48 is exactly what should be happening but with solid evidence of misconduct they only thing they tried to protect was their image.
Sounds a whole lot like "don't pay attention to the 90 million we just payed out to someone important who commited sexual harassment, look at these 48 unimportant people we fired without severance for doing the same thing". Deflect and distract, the best way to get the conversation off of the real story.
Though I understand the sentiment you're going for, the removal of 48 people committing sexual harassment in the workplace is a positive regardless of "importance".
Oh definitely totally positive and super important but it's being used to try to get people to gloss over an arguably more important story, that is the one that got away without any reprocussions. What they did to 48 is exactly what should be happening but with solid evidence of misconduct they only thing they tried to protect was their image.
Who did they pay 90 million to?
It's strange that the article doesn't link to it, but it's a response to this New York Times investigation that they mention: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/25/technology/google-sexual-harassment-andy-rubin.html