IBM recruitment effort backfire reveals why women avoid STEM "#HackAHairDryer"
- Page 1 of 1
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ibm-apology-hack-a-hair-dryer_5665a739e4b08e945ff004c9
After catching blowback on Twitter and elsewhere, IBM apologized Monday for trying to appeal to women in tech by asking them to hack hair dryers.Yeah girls/women just need to be encouraged to hack beauty products, the avoidance of STEM has nothing to do with the very attitudes that promoted this stupid ass recruitment effort in the first place.
The company said it would discontinue #HackAHairDryer, an ad campaign that unintentionally delivered the unfortunate message that if you want women to be interested in tech you need to make it all about "girl stuff." The whole thing came off like corporate "pinkwashing," the adult equivalent of pink Legos. Twitter outrage came quickly, particularly from women in tech – the intended audience for the campaign.
"The videos were part of a larger campaign to promote STEM careers," the company told HuffPost in an emailed statement. ("STEM" refers to science, technology, engineering and mathematics.) "It missed the mark for some and we apologize. It is being discontinued."
The ad appears to have been well-intentioned and reflects a broader push by the company – one of only 22 on the S&P 500 led by a female CEO – to attract women.
lol what in the actual fuck?
Lets attract women to stem by using gendered stereotypes. What could go wrong?
Lets attract women to stem by using gendered stereotypes. What could go wrong?
By Fenderputty Go To Postlol what in the actual fuck?And now they can pretend they tried and women just don't want to work in science. Spin the wheel.
Lets attract women to stem by using gendered stereotypes. What could go wrong?
I think this is an overreaction, honestly.
But I tend to think misguided efforts or poorly executed good ideas should get flack, but not too much.
Like, there are actual people that want to turn this place into Nazi Germany. In that environment it's hard for me to get riled up over a company trying something good, being inept, and then apologizing.
But I tend to think misguided efforts or poorly executed good ideas should get flack, but not too much.
Like, there are actual people that want to turn this place into Nazi Germany. In that environment it's hard for me to get riled up over a company trying something good, being inept, and then apologizing.
Not everything needs to be viewed through a relative filter. Just because A is more outrageous than B, that doesn't make B less of a serious topic nor an overreaction because of the comparison thereof.
And no, I don't think it's over-reactionary, especially since it's just part of a larger systemic issue within our society and especially within the STEM fields
And no, I don't think it's over-reactionary, especially since it's just part of a larger systemic issue within our society and especially within the STEM fields
When a recruitment effort is not looking inward at how its industry alienates a group and instead relies on gendered stereotypes as a means of trying to attract said group, it pretty much illuminates the entire problem with that industry and field.
Also maybe we'd be less prone to fascism if the general public who knows better took more umbrage with minorities being treated like shit.
Also maybe we'd be less prone to fascism if the general public who knows better took more umbrage with minorities being treated like shit.
By 3SidedPolygons Go To PostI think this is an overreaction, honestly.
We must consider the feelings of a piece of paper in a drawer in Delaware.
By blackace Go To Postsmh… maybe #hackaDreamcast was next for minorities#hackaturntable
By DY_nasty Go To Post#hackaturntable#hackacottongin
.....
How did this get past their PR reps? Fair play to them for having a female CEO, but honestly, what are these Social Media managers doing? Their managers? Their managers' managers?
How did this get past their PR reps? Fair play to them for having a female CEO, but honestly, what are these Social Media managers doing? Their managers? Their managers' managers?