Business ethics case study

9/11/2019 Google's Handling of the Echo Chamber Manifesto - Markkula Center for Applied Ethics

https://www.scu.edu/ethics/focus-areas/business-ethics/resources/googles-handling-of-the-echo-chamber-manifesto/ 1/4

Google's Handling of the Echo Chamber Manifesto Home Markkula Center for Applied Ethics Focus Areas Business Ethics Business Ethics Resources

Google's Handling of the Echo Chamber Manifesto › › › ›

›

Case study exploring gender in a Silicon Valley company

Sara Tangdall

Background

In recent years, Google has been under

major scrutiny for gender discrimination,

and the Department of Labor is

investigating Google for a potential gender

pay gap.  Also, Silicon Valley has been

exposed as a community that repeatedly

discriminates against women and other

minorities, and research shows that the

gender disparity in tech jobs is pervasive

and widespread.  As a result, Google has

made a major push to create a more

diverse and inclusive work culture. 

In August of 2017, Google fired a male software engineer, James Damore, after he internally

posted a memo that relied on inaccurate gender stereotypes to criticize Google’s

implementation of its diversity and inclusion initiative. The memo was leaked to the press,

which lead to a public outcry and exacerbated an already tense time for gender diversity in

Silicon Valley. 

Around the same time as Damore’s firing, a white supremacist protest that turned violent in

Charlottesville, Virginia, heightened an already tense conversation about the complexities of

free speech in America.  The overall conflicting views on free speech are split down

ideological lines:  Conservatives say they aren’t free to express their views because liberals

will accuse them of being politically incorrect, while liberals believe that in an effort towards

being more inclusive, people should avoid using language that is potentially offensive to

marginalized communities. 

The Memo

Damore says he was trying to point out that sometimes conservative viewpoints aren’t

welcome at Google because of its liberal “echo chamber.”  The memo also says that Google

discriminates against certain employees and offers development opportunities “only for

people with a certain gender or race,” and that Google has lowered the bar by hiring diverse

candidates.  Damore believes that in order to have a truly diverse culture, Google needs to

create a safe space for more conservative views. 

Damore’s memo also states that one of the central reasons there are fewer women than

men in tech is women are biologically different from men.  Damore then references

scientifically unfounded gender stereotypes to support this line of reasoning.  Some of the

stereotypes he uses include:  women are more neurotic than men; women are less capable

of handling stress; and women are better at relationships than men because men are better

at “things.” 

The Response

Google CEO Sundar Pichai (AP Photo/Manu Fernandez, File)

Business Ethics Resources

A Model for Leadership Ethics

Create an Ethical Decision Making Framework for

Your Organization

Articles

Cases

Event Summaries

Online Courses

Videos

         

MENU Search

9/11/2019 Google's Handling of the Echo Chamber Manifesto - Markkula Center for Applied Ethics

https://www.scu.edu/ethics/focus-areas/business-ethics/resources/googles-handling-of-the-echo-chamber-manifesto/ 2/4

After the memo was leaked, many criticized the contents, calling Damore and his memo

“anti-diversity,” with Google employees and some of the general public saying they were

offended by its contents.  Critics said Damore’s memo is exactly the type of discrimination

that keeps women out of the tech industry, and some female Google employees expressed

discomfort at having to work with Damore. 

The day after the memo was leaked, Google’s VP of Diversity and Inclusion, Danielle Brown,

issued a statement criticizing the discriminatory content of the memo, saying it did not align

with Google’s dedication to creating a truly diverse workforce.  Three days after the public

release of the memo, Damore confirmed Google had fired him. 

Sundar Pichai, Google’s CEO, released a statement explaining the decision to fire Damore. 

Pichai’s statement points out that some of Damore’s criticisms of Google’s attempts at

creating a truly diverse culture are valid, but the memo violated parts of the company’s code

of conduct “by advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace.”  Pichai also writes,

“To suggest a group of our colleagues have traits that make them less biologically suited to

that work is offensive and not OK.” 

Those who disagree with the firing say it confirms Damore’s main argument:  that Google

does have a liberal echo chamber; Google is intolerant to conservative views; and that its

diversity efforts have actually backfired and stifled diversity.  Others who disagree point to

Damore’s right to free speech.  However, there is some legal ambiguity in this case because

companies have the legal right to fire an employee who makes statements that could create

a hostile working environment for other employees in a protected class (gender, age, sexual

orientation, etc.), particularly in an at-will state like California, where Google is

headquartered.  But, in California, an employee cannot be fired for their political views,

complicating the legal aspects of this situation even further.  Damore sought out legal

counsel after Google fired him, and he is currently deciding whether or not to sue for

wrongful termination. 

Those who believe Google made the right decision by firing Damore point out that the

company has made a very public commitment to creating a diverse and inclusive culture,

and to have an openly discriminatory employee breaks that commitment.  Keeping Damore

around could also negatively impact morale among employees, create a hostile working

environment, and lead to a backslide in culture.  Additionally, Google has a peer review

process, whereby employees review one another’s performance.  These reviews directly

influence potential raises, bonuses, and promotions, so Damore’s critics question whether

he could be trusted to give fair reviews when he has openly discriminated against his female

colleagues in the memo. 

Discussion Questions 

1. Legally, Google’s firing of Damore may or may not be problematic, but is Google’s

firing of Damore ethical?

2. Would you have made the same decision if you were Pichai?

3. Is it ethical for an organization to fire someone who expresses beliefs that don’t align

with the overall culture?

4. Do efforts towards a more diverse work culture stifle employees from speaking out?

What can leaders do to avert this potential outcome?

You may find the Center’s Framework for Ethical Decision Making useful in thinking through

these questions.

Sara Tangdall is the Business, Leadership, and Social Sector Ethics Program Coordinator at

the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics.

Sep 11, 2017

MENU Search

9/11/2019 Google's Handling of the Echo Chamber Manifesto - Markkula Center for Applied Ethics

https://www.scu.edu/ethics/focus-areas/business-ethics/resources/googles-handling-of-the-echo-chamber-manifesto/ 3/4

M A R K K U L A C E N T E R F O R A P P L I E D E T H I C S

Take Us to a Future Where We are Safe - Markkula Center for Applied Ethics 1 comment • 22 days ago

David Vossbrink — Equivocation does have its ethical place, depending on circumstances. MacBeth also took aim at

On the Ethics of Hysteria - Markkula Center for Applied Ethics 1 comment • a year ago

Peter Minowitz — Over 2300 years ago, Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics emphasized the challenges that anger

Factual Basis of an Opinion Piece - Markkula Center for Applied Ethics 1 comment • a month ago

Aliya Blackburn — 1. I think Elena should still publish the opinion piece.Freedom of speech means people are allowed to

Maintaining Objectivity when Confronted by Horror - Markkula 8 comments • 22 days ago

Peter Minowitz — Thank you for clarifying the temporal fluidity in our exchanges— and for offering another elegant

ALSO ON MARKKULA CENTER FOR APPLIED ETHICS

2 Comments Markkula Center for Applied Ethics Login1

t Tweet f Share Sort by Best

LOG IN WITH OR SIGN UP WITH DISQUS

Name

Join the discussion…

?

• Reply •

JP • 2 years ago

see more

The author of this article is fairly loose with the facts. Damore references "scientifically unfounded gender stereotypes" she says, when in fact the opposite is true; a quick search reveals multiple studies in peer reviewed journals that confirm exactly the male/female differences he mentioned. One is not better than the other, simply different. While the author may not be aware that there actually is science that supports Damore's stance on the issue, I believe it is wrong for her to attack his memo without first verifying the veracity of her own statements ("scientifically unfounded stereotypes"). It really doesn't take that much time or effort to find research journal articles in the electronic age. What I find more troubling is that someone fostering a discussion on ethics clearly misrepresented what Damore actually wrote in his document. His supposed position is that women are better at relationships, and men are better at "things", giving the impression that Damore believes women are inept. What he actually wrote? "Women on average show a higher interest in people and men in things" He is not making a blanket statement regarding every man and every woman, but rather the tendencies of the average, i.e. the relative positions of a male population distribution versus that of a female population. Furthermore, he clearly does NOT say that men are better at

△ ▽

• Reply •

Jennifer Gaspar- Santos • a year ago> JP

To add on to this thread. This vox article provides lots of insight for me. https://www.vox.com/the-big... Cynthia Lee writes: "It is striking to me that the manifesto author repeatedly lists race alongside gender when listing programs and preferences he thinks should be done away with, but, unlike gender, he never purports to have any scientific backing for this. The omission is telling. Would defenders of the memo still be comfortable if the author had casually summarized race and IQ studies to argue that purported biological differences — not discrimination or unequal access to education — explained Google’s shortage of African- American programmers?" 1 △ ▽

✉ d

Recommend  8

Share ›

Share ›

Vari Hall, Santa Clara University

500 El Camino Real

ABOUT THE CENTER

News

PROGRAMS

Focus Areas

RESOURCES

Ethical Decision Making

MENU Search

9/11/2019 Google's Handling of the Echo Chamber Manifesto - Markkula Center for Applied Ethics

https://www.scu.edu/ethics/focus-areas/business-ethics/resources/googles-handling-of-the-echo-chamber-manifesto/ 4/4

S A N TA C L A R A U N I V E R S I T Y © 2019 · Accessibility Login |  

Santa Clara, CA 95053

408-554-5319 

Maps & Directions

Contact Us

    

Privacy Policy

Ethics Experts for Media

Donate

Events

Training

Email Sign-up

Articles

Cases

Curricula MENU Search