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

FB to curb internal debate over sensitive issues amid employee discord

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 527 posts

Re: FB to curb internal debate over sensitive issues amid employee discord

#31

Post by jjice »

jseliger wrote: post #27
patorjk wrote: post #5

At 3 paragraphs (131 words), that was a really short article. However, I agree with the subheading: "Mark Zuckerberg says employees shouldn’t have to confront social issues in their day-to-day work unless they want to" That sounds good to me. I've never had to talk about these kind of things at work. Are there work places where this is unavoidable?

It's interesting to watch companies rediscover the old rule about leaving politics and religion at the door.

It seems like it's slowly died over the past decade. Thankfully, my past two jobs were very work focused without much political involvement.

However, I'm sure it's easier for my jobs since they were for a retail company and an engineering firm.

Re: FB to curb internal debate over sensitive issues amid employee discord

#32

Post by jgacook »

Generally I try and shy away from being too alarmist, but I am so disillusioned with the kind of tech worker HN's userbase seems to represent. I think it's a feckless attitude to think that working in one of the best-paid, global, most influential professions in the world right now means that your only obligation is to clock in on time, code whatever you're told to code, take no ownership of the effect your work may have on the general public and collect your fat paycheck at the end of the month.

Why does it sound good to anyone that Facebook employees should be prevented from discussing the ethical implications of the product they sell their labor to create? Facebook complete lack of accountability - internal or governmental - has to date:

- incited a genocide [https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/15/technology/myanmar-facebo...]

- provided a bias for right wing content in a American election year (and fired the employee who blew the whistle on it) [https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/ne...]

- exacerbated a global pandemic, indirectly causing 1000s of deaths, by not policing Covid misinformation [https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/aug/19/facebook-...]

- is arguably a contributor to the global rise in authoritarianism [https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/feb/24/facebo...]

and that's really just the tip of the iceberg. If you buy into the notion that Mark Zuckerberg is a nice man in a hoodie trying to run a business that his employees are tearing down with some radical agenda then I'm sorry, but how naive are you? Facebook has a track record of ignoring the consequences of what happens on their platform in order to continue profiting. It's not a mistake, it's the point.

We should be cheering on tech workers challenging the ethics of the work they produce, not talking about how inconvenient it is for Facebook workers to start realizing how questionable the product they're building really is.

Re: FB to curb internal debate over sensitive issues amid employee discord

#33

Post by sigstoat »

t-writescode wrote: post #26
toomim wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you work ... with huge social responsibilities, discussions about ethics ought to be unavoidable, in my opinion. The problem is distinguishing ethics from politics . These are very hard to disentangle, because ethical values are usually based on some political orientation. And I don't want Facebook to be making political decisions on my behalf, as a user. And I don't even want internal employee discussions to be…

> because ethical values are usually based on some political orientation Are you sure that isn't exactly backwards? Because it definitely should be the other direction in my very strong opinion. One's morals or beliefs on ethics should inform their politics, not the other way around. One way is based around a person's inner being, the other is molding their being and stances based on a sports team.

one of you is describing the world as it is, and the other the world as you think it ought to be.

Re: FB to curb internal debate over sensitive issues amid employee discord

#34

Post by jessaustin »

fivre wrote: post #16

I've made attempts to reach out to some of my old friends there on the T&S team in light of some evidence really blatant Russian agitprop thriving and finding an audience there. Between this and the Zhang memo, however, it looks quite doubtful that I'd be able to do much more than reconnect and share a rather depressing lunch as they explain that their hands are tied because of executive will. The IRA and/or its succ…

...they've apparently learned from their mistakes...

So the dastardly Russkies didn't intend that Trump be elected? Someone tell Rachel Maddow! This changes everything!

Re: FB to curb internal debate over sensitive issues amid employee discord

#36

Post by themacguffinman »

sg47 wrote: post #21
ugh123 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the point is that employees that are taking advantage of free speech within the workplace are forcing others into the debate unwillingly, and this is causing strife and resentment. I applaud the move.

Just like miscreants are taking advantage of free speech by spreading misinformation and conspiracy theories on FB the platform?

Forcing others into debate and spreading conspiracy theories are two different matters. The former impinges on the basic freedom of speech and association for other people, while the latter affects no one's freedoms. The former is a matter of principle, the latter is a subjective judgement.

Re: FB to curb internal debate over sensitive issues amid employee discord

#37

Post by rsynnott »

satya71 wrote: post #8

How about bringing the same rules to the wider FB? I just want to look at baby pictures and connect with friends. I don't want to be part of a machinery that spreads misinformation and conspiracy theories.

I'd give that about 10 minutes before someone started claiming that their baby was immune to covid, and then you're right back where you started.

Re: FB to curb internal debate over sensitive issues amid employee discord

#38

Post by JamesBarney »

kurthr wrote: post #6
AlexandrB wrote: post #4

Weird that an outspoken free speech advocate like Mark Zuckerberg would want to limit the speech of his employees.

Especially since they presumably use FB for internal discussions... Why not use the same (weak) moderation mechanisms everyone else has? Not like you can avoid politics on your regular feed. I guess he realizes they don't work.

It seems far easier to police the 50,000 people you write checks to, than a billion users.

Re: FB to curb internal debate over sensitive issues amid employee discord

#39

Post by dahart »

daok wrote: post #11
patorjk wrote: post #5

At 3 paragraphs (131 words), that was a really short article. However, I agree with the subheading: "Mark Zuckerberg says employees shouldn’t have to confront social issues in their day-to-day work unless they want to" That sounds good to me. I've never had to talk about these kind of things at work. Are there work places where this is unavoidable?

Yes. There are places where employees MUST go in these meetings that talk about social differences, inclusions, diversity, etc.

Everyone has to discuss diversity at work because there are laws prohibiting discrimination, that's a good thing. Not everyone has to discuss politics at work.

Re: FB to curb internal debate over sensitive issues amid employee discord

#40

Post by iron0013 »

How is this different from silencing employee objections to unethical corporate practices? It’s not merely “talking politics at work” to point out that, for example, your company’s practices are helping a political party steal an election. That’s an ethical concern, not a political one.
Post reply on HN