Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity

ethicalsystems.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

571–580 of 734 posts

Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity

#571

Post by milkytron »

krageon wrote: post #442
lifeisstillgood wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you feel more comfortable in a company that openly encouraged / enforced political debate within a civil framework? Is the problem (in your company and the world at large) that open respectful political debate has not got a common set of rules / words? If there was a phrase "I respectfully disagree - I understand that ..." was a phrase used by every TV host, Politician and Facebook poster, would prefacing your…

> in a company No, because companies have absolutely 0 incentive to stand by you if doing so becomes difficult. They are amoral, when they throw you under the bus it's like a lion killing a gazelle. Just something they do. You should not ever trust any company in any way.

> You should not ever trust any company in any way.

Idk if I agree with this. There needs to be some level of trust. I trust them to pay my paycheck, I trust them to respect the contract I signed when hired. I trust them to give me my tax information in a timely manner. Now, those are some examples that are backed by law or contracts, but if you don't trust any company in any way, then you could be missing out on some of the benefits of said company.

I'm also highly skeptical of all companies and make sure boundaries exist that when crossed will result in my departure. But there is definitely a balance, and some level of trust needs to exist.

Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity

#572

Post by Hercuros »

giantg2 wrote: post #397
livinginfear wrote: post #80

I consider myself a very politically informed person. I'm not a politically active person however, largely for the reasons mentioned in the article. I considered myself a liberal by the standards of the time I grew up in. My views on some social issues, particularly 'free speech', are considered a conservative now. I am one of the people the article is concerning who will not publicly voice their political opinions i…

I've been one to speak my mind. I see myself as having been punished for it. I was doing work a grade or two above mine but was held back from promotion. So I didn't make senior developer on that team. Then I was even in jeopardy of losing my job over a statement I made (not vulgar, disrespectful, or anything) so I have to switch stacks a couple times to move out of a bad area of the company. I'm 9 years in and just…

I think it is still understandable though that making those kinds of technical corrections about a study could be perceived as "defining away the problem" or getting too technical about a (potentially) real societal issue.

The mere fact that you are talking about "TV reporters" way of talking about things communicates that you have a disdain for the way such issues are commonly discussed in the media or by the general public, and correcting their statement about the study also seems to suggest that according to you really there is no gender wage gap (or it's less of an issue than people would seem to generally think), it's all just due to personal choice or preference in what type of jobs they do or something to that effect.

You can of course agree or disagree about a lot of these things, but I do think that sometimes a "mere factual correction" can have additional connotations that are much more political and not just neutral statements. It's often the opinion or suggestion behind the factual correction that causes more offense.

Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity

#573

Post by lucasverra »

ex_amazon_sde wrote: post #526
adamrezich wrote: post #466

Earlier quoted context omitted.

people have been programmed, on a massive scale, to react emotionally to certain learned key phrases and terms. when this automatic emotional reaction occurs, all logical processing ceases immediately, and the person you're talking to either immediately leaves the conversation (if you're lucky) or starts emotionally, verbally attacking you as though your non-conforming line of thought is a pathogen and their overreac…

Social media did a lot to foster outrage and destroy nuanced thinking. But also decades of materialism and "me me me" culture: I think people learn to follow their desires no-matter-what when buying goods or services and the same emotional mechanism is transferred into "buying in" an idea. Modern advertising and branding is based on emotion and vague ideas. The same algorithms to target online ads have been used to i…

> Social media did a lot to foster outrage and destroy nuanced thinking.

Plug as a founder: We are trying to balance things out on Polemix.co (invite code LV005) Launched 6 weeks ago, we bring together people from both sides of hot questions. The format is inspired from TikTok and consists of 30-second videos in which speakers answer YES or NO to controversial questions. The app’s goal is to break echo chambers.

If you are passionate about exchange of ideas, please shoot me your thoughts to feedback@polemix.co to have your view on social media outrage.

Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity

#575

Post by mensetmanusman »

Digory wrote: post #509
amalcon wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Western society seems to have gotten the idea that "debate" is either talking heads trying to shout over each other, presenting prepared arguments to random unprepared people and claiming victory when it takes time to respond, or simply presenting opinions back and forth without trying to justify them. This is tied to the (independent but both incorrect) notions that whoever has the last word in a debate is the winne…

Unfortunately, structured competitive debate these days has gone off the rails. At least, college debate in the US has become ridiculous. Moot court and mock trial retain some semblance of argumentation. But you would have to reinvent the kind of formal debate you’re imagining.

It’s hilarious. Robots talking as quickly as possible to gain points.

Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity

#576

Post by nickik »

NullPrefix wrote: post #473
yerwhat01010 wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I take it you support the Uighur genocide in China, the Maduro regime in Venezuela, the current covid crisis in India, the humanitarian crisis in Yemen, and the persecution of the Rohingya in Myanmar? Or are you doing something to actively fight against them?

These are too easy. Could we come up with conflicts where both sides are somewhat equal in power and both have a rightful claim?

Taiwan China.

North South Korea.

Kashmir.

Nagorno-Karabakh. I have not seen this much in the social media.

Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity

#577

Post by edenhyacinth »

someguydave wrote: post #563
stickfigure wrote: post #489

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe, but I still think there's an important point in there. We (society) do a lot of handwringing about CEO and engineering jobs, but these aren't even remotely the most gender-asymmetric careers out there. According to [1], "Locomotive engineers and operators" are 92.3 percent male. I'm willing to bet that if you can "fix" that problem - or even conclusively identify the cause - gender imbalance issues in other fi…

“fixing” that “problem” would involve somehow convincing many women to enter a career field in which they have no interest. How do you propose to force them to change their desires?

That argument assumes women aren't interested in those roles, and that their disinterest is the only or primary thing that causes an imbalance.

You have to know that isn't true, which makes this a great example of why people are frustrated about discussing anything 'political' in the workplace.

Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity

#578

Post by beaconstudios »

lucasverra wrote: post #573
ex_amazon_sde wrote: post #526

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Social media did a lot to foster outrage and destroy nuanced thinking. But also decades of materialism and "me me me" culture: I think people learn to follow their desires no-matter-what when buying goods or services and the same emotional mechanism is transferred into "buying in" an idea. Modern advertising and branding is based on emotion and vague ideas. The same algorithms to target online ads have been used to i…

> Social media did a lot to foster outrage and destroy nuanced thinking. Plug as a founder: We are trying to balance things out on Polemix.co (invite code LV005) Launched 6 weeks ago, we bring together people from both sides of hot questions. The format is inspired from TikTok and consists of 30-second videos in which speakers answer YES or NO to controversial questions. The app’s goal is to break echo chambers. If y…

How does only allowing yes or no answers increase nuance?

Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity

#579

Post by ex_amazon_sde »

sangnoir wrote: post #566
ex_amazon_sde wrote: post #526

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Social media did a lot to foster outrage and destroy nuanced thinking. But also decades of materialism and "me me me" culture: I think people learn to follow their desires no-matter-what when buying goods or services and the same emotional mechanism is transferred into "buying in" an idea. Modern advertising and branding is based on emotion and vague ideas. The same algorithms to target online ads have been used to i…

> Social media did a lot to foster outrage and destroy nuanced thinking. Way before social media, there was short wave radio, then cable news which introduced the 24-hour news cycle, and entertainment-shows-disguised-as-news with their permanently outraged talking heads (think Rachel Maddow or Tucker Carlson). Political polarization is older than social media, and it wasn't emergent - it was a deliberate political ta…

> Political polarization is older than social media

Yes, it was widely reported in debates in ancient Athens and the Roman empire.

But I wrote "Social media did a lot to foster outrage and destroy nuanced thinking.", which is different.

Humanity has never seen before a billion-dollar industry generating user engagement by fueling online altercation.

Instant gratification, dopamine cycle addiction and all of that.

Re: New evidence that British workplaces are losing viewpoint diversity

#580

Post by giantg2 »

edenhyacinth wrote: post #577
someguydave wrote: post #563

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“fixing” that “problem” would involve somehow convincing many women to enter a career field in which they have no interest. How do you propose to force them to change their desires?

That argument assumes women aren't interested in those roles, and that their disinterest is the only or primary thing that causes an imbalance. You have to know that isn't true, which makes this a great example of why people are frustrated about discussing anything 'political' in the workplace.

Do you have some data to support your assumption that they do want to be in those roles in higher numbers that they are already?
Post reply on HN