Summary
Meta’s recent shift to right-leaning policies, including ending fact-checking in the U.S., scaling back content moderation, and allowing anti-LGBTQ rhetoric, has sparked boycotts and a user exodus.
The company also disbanded its diversity, equity, and inclusion team, drawing criticism.
Prominent users like director Cord Jefferson and nonprofits like Equal Access Public Media have left or reduced activity on Meta platforms.
Many are migrating to alternatives such as Bluesky, Amigahood, and Tumblr, while some remain trapped due to Meta’s dominance in communication and business.
Oh I agree, but DEI initiatives are very pro-business specifically. They help increase profits. And these late-stage capitalist assholes don’t even get it.
That part I don’t know. I’m not saying it’s not true, I certainly see the reasoning for why it should be good for business. But the classic conservative counter-argument is that you shouldn’t need to regulate it, because The Mythical Free Market should ensure that companies with a more diverse workforce out-compete the others.
So I prefer to think that sometimes you do things that are right just because you think they are right and even if they cost you. And as part of that, you vote with your wallet and maybe use products that are slightly less shiny and convenient than others because the companies behind them treat people more nicely. And then the Mythical Free Market does also start taking care of things and allowing these nicer companies to survive and even out-compete the Metas of this world. (But we’re all here discussing on Lemmy, so probably I’m already preaching to the choir on this one)
Several years ago I got to have lunch with the head of HR at my then-employer. It was a mid sized publicly traded global corporation, and the HR VP was generally the old white sanitized robot you’d expect.
The one discussion I remember was him describing how diversity is legitimately an asset for businesses that produces better results. It wasn’t “we believe in equality” or “we show the public that we care” or “we have to.” It was literally that it makes the big number get a little bit bigger. And to be clear, I’m a white guy like him.
So when huge companies cast it aside I think the most gracious possible interpretation is that the soulless drones that value only money see more benefit in having the support of the right wing government and the worst parts of the population than having a better performing workforce.
There are much less kind interpretations obviously, and some of them are probably right.
But DEI isn’t regulated. It’s just a policy some companies and local governments have. Fewer and fewer because conservatives keep throwing hissy fits about it.
I get your point and you’re right, thanks, I used “regulated” wrong. I meant that the expectation, if the market worked as advertised, is that companies that do keep DEI policies in place would have a competitive advantage over others. Then, clearly, sucking up to whoever’s in power has a much larger effect on these companies’ profits, so the market is probably not working as advertised…
The issue with letting the market resolve everything is that means we will permit companies to intentionally harm people until we figure out they are the issue rather than stopping practices we know to be harmful ahead of time. This is the bit that never gets stressed in school when you learn about right wing libertarianism in US schools.
I agree with you. I’m not saying we should leave it to the market and I’m sorry if I didn’t express myself clearly enough.
My point was that not being an asshole and working towards a society where we treat each other like decent human beings should be a valuable goal and even if it wasn’t the profitable thing to do, we should be prepared to give up something in exchange for it. If it turns out it is ALSO the profitable thing to do, even better, because at that point even the Musks of the world will get around to it eventually, but I mean for us regular and hopefully decent human beings…
The thing is that a lot of people who advocate for it don’t seem to be willing to accept even minor inconveniences like getting off Facebook or X, let alone losing some actual potential money.
Workforce diversity was touched on in my college business courses (I went to work in the non-profit sector).
It’s a benefit to companies for all the reasons squid stated. Nixing it is virtue signaling towards the fascist regime.
I’m really happy to hear that, thanks! I mean, not the nixing part… the “not being a complete asshole is even good for business”