Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a bit ironic that you're bashing Google and praising Go in the same paragraph, never mentioning that Go is designed and supported by Google.
I think that was part of the point. Google made Go and then when OP wanted to use Go, their bosses said “use Java” (and took a month to do something that could be done in a few days)
It could say - Google is bad in that and that BUT it has Go. Or it could say - Google designed Go and is interested in its adoption BUT its own managers don't think that Google developers want to learn Go.
But instead it says that Google documentation "does not teach you how to fish" and "you're not sure how to proceed" and at the same time Go somehow gets away with it - "At least with the Go libraries it's feasible to read the entire source code and flesh out things on the edge of documentation".