About 100 bold Facebook employees have stepped forward to align themselves with a group calling for ideological rather than merely cosmetic diversity.
In an unusually fair story, The New York Times reported on this development.
“The post went up quietly on Facebook’s internal message board last week. Titled ‘We Have a Problem With Political Diversity,’ it quickly took off inside the social network. ‘We are a political monoculture that’s intolerant of different views,’ Brian Amerige, a senior Facebook engineer, wrote in the post, which was obtained by The New York Times. ‘We claim to welcome all perspectives, but are quick to attack — often in mobs — anyone who presents a view that appears to be in opposition to left-leaning ideology.’ Since the post went up, more than 100 Facebook employees have joined Mr. Amerige to form an online group called FB’ers for Political Diversity, according to two people who viewed the group’s page and who were not authorized to speak publicly. The aim of the initiative, according to Mr. Amerige’s memo, is to create a space for ideological diversity within the company.”
The post went up quietly on Facebook’s internal message board. Titled “We Have a Problem With Political Diversity,” it quickly took off inside the social network. https://t.co/aHEZ09cRSh
— The New York Times (@nytimes) August 29, 2018
“‘Amerige’s post continues to criticize Facebook’s emphasis on racial and gender diversity and how it, along with the company’s overt liberal bias, threatens the ‘viability as a company,'” The Daily Caller noted.
Big Tech hates ideological diversity.
"More than 100 conservative FB employees have joined an internal message board to protest…the company’s “intolerant” liberal culture."
"Amerige added that Facebook has made “all lives matter” a “fireable offense” https://t.co/ZJoJHBcnjZ
— Andrew Surabian (@Surabees) August 29, 2018
Ex-Google engineer James Damore also accused his employer of fostering an ideological echo chamber and was subsequently fired. His lawsuit against the search engine giant is pending.
Unlike the mainstream or legacy media outlets who cling the fantasy of objectivity, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has admitted that Silicon Valley is a left-leaning place, and Twitter boss Jack Dorsey (who testifies on Capitol Hill next week about censorship of right-leaning voices on social media) has described his network as left-leaning.
Both nonetheless claim that there is no censorship in play in algorithms or otherwise, although many perceived conservative/libertarian/populist voices have found themselves put into a time out, particularly recently.
From time to time, Big Tech, a.k.a. Big Social, has responded that they made a made a mistake in the context of certain suspensions, deletions, or shadow-banning — such as in the case of California congressional candidate Elizabeth Heng –but can you recall this ever happening to left-wing or progressive content?
It took Facebook five full days to lift this arbitrary ban on my family’s story of surviving communist genocide. It's maddening to feel like my story is being silenced on Facebook. Not acceptable! https://t.co/me5v3OJWK6
— Elizabeth Heng (@ElizabethHeng) August 8, 2018
Thank you @foxandfriends for sharing my story this morning! My parents lived through the Khmer Rouge’s genocide in Cambodia, & I wanted to share their story, which was then censored by FB. This silencing of conservative voices is a huge problem. https://t.co/WVkqXjQMkc
— Elizabeth Heng (@ElizabethHeng) August 23, 2018
Twitter has even been accused of throttling the #StopTheBias hashtag.
President Trump has also weighed in on the controversy.
….results on “Trump News” are from National Left-Wing Media, very dangerous. Google & others are suppressing voices of Conservatives and hiding information and news that is good. They are controlling what we can & cannot see. This is a very serious situation-will be addressed!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 28, 2018
#StopTheBias pic.twitter.com/xqz599iQZw
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 29, 2018
There have been calls from both ends of the ideological spectrum to consider regulating these influential Big Tech social networks along the lines of public utilities.