Read on Twitter
I’ve been thinking a lot about the supposed “apology” @sundarpichai gave to @timnitGebru because it is a perfect example of the harm that a non-apology can cause. https://www.theverge.com/2020/12/9/22165983/google-ceo-sundar-pichai-apology-timnit-gebru-exit
When called out for being racist or for supporting structural discrimination, those in power tend to lash out by giving an “apology,” which is usually an insidious way of avoiding blame.
Pichai’s supposed apology begins with a sentence about all the work that Google has done to combat racism:
“One of the things I’ve been most proud of this year is how Googlers from across the company came together to address our racial equity commitments”
“One of the things I’ve been most proud of this year is how Googlers from across the company came together to address our racial equity commitments”
But whether Pichai realizes it or not, this sentence isn’t anti-racist. While white people might look at that sentence and pat themselves on the back, the subtext for BIPOC is that the racism at Google is being dealt with and is not truly a problem.
This sentence says: “Why are you complaining about racism when we’re already fixing it?”
A better apology wouldn’t have mentioned this anti-racism work until further down, or simply left it out completely.
Next, Pichai writes about the outcry surrounding the firing of Gebru, and gets around to apologizing. But the apology isn’t directed toward Gebru.
Pichai says he feels sorry that so many people are mad at Google.
Pichai says he feels sorry that so many people are mad at Google.
This is another common pattern: those in power will give conditional apologies that somehow manage to keep them from being at fault.
Saying “I’m sorry that you feel that way” or “I’m sorry if I hurt you” does not constitute an apology. These statements redirect blame away from the individual who caused harm.
Isn’t the point of apologizing to try to own up for what you did and provide some form of reparations?
Isn’t the point of apologizing to try to own up for what you did and provide some form of reparations?
In a genuine apology, this section would read “I am very sorry for this firing. I take full responsibility.” Or something like that. I’m sure the smart people at Google could come up with something better than what I wrote.
Then, further down in the “apology,” Pichai says that a full review of “Gebru’s departure” will take place, again without mentioning any wrongdoing. He specifically mentions “deescalation strategies,” another attempt to make Gebru, who is Black, the problem: https://twitter.com/timnitgebru/status/1336758636262125571
The subtext throughout this “apology” is that Gebru is the problem. For example:
“One of the best aspects of Google’s engineering culture is our sincere desire to understand where things go wrong and how we can improve.”
“One of the best aspects of Google’s engineering culture is our sincere desire to understand where things go wrong and how we can improve.”
Yes, Pichai, that’s great. But you can’t “both-sides” your way out of this. By talking about it as if its a computer program that threw an error, you make it seem as if Gebru is at least as bad as her higher-ups.
Again, casting blame on the victim.
Again, casting blame on the victim.
The fourth paragraph comes closest to an apology. It begins: “we need to accept responsibility for the fact that a prominent Black, female leader with immense talent left Google unhappily.” TLDR yes, yes you do.
Yet for all the talk about accepting responsibility, Pichai does very little of that in the rest of the paragraph. Even the end of the first sentence says: “[Gebru] left Google unhappily.” It doesn’t say “We created an unhealthy environment for Gebru.”
Again, it paints Gebru as the problem.
The fifth paragraph is a mess of weird gaslighting. I’m not going to get into that.
Finally, Pichai ends by saying he wants to commit energy towards solving racism — but he fails to acknowledge that he might be a part of it. Again, he pushes blame away from himself, and actually tries to cast himself as the hero of this story.
In the end, Pichai’s “apology” amounts to little more than an effort to position himself and the company as a repentful entity that doesn’t deserve this blame.
A true apology would read more like this: “I’m so sorry for not realizing that the internal culture at Google was so racist. We accept responsibility for creating a bad workspace. We will work to make amends in the future [list specific ways to start work on preventing racism]”
But Pichai doesn’t say that. Because a non-apology is easier than a true apology.
I’m not saying that a true apology would have solved everything. In fact, it would have just been the start of much more. But it would have been better than nothing.
In fact, in my opinion, learning to make sincere apologies is not just nice, but a _necessary_ step in racial justice work.
For those of you wanting to learn more, @miamingus has an amazing write-up about it here: https://leavingevidence.wordpress.com/2019/12/18/how-to-give-a-good-apology-part-1-the-four-parts-of-accountability/
And finally, I am SO HAPPY to see Gebru standing up not standing down in the face of all of this gaslighting. It is incredibly hard to do. This type of public gaslighting is _incredibly_ difficult to deal with. But thank you. And just know that #ISupportTimnit
