Business Exclusive: Meta kills DEI programs

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
1736531932309.png


Mark Zuckerberg's Meta is terminating major DEI programs, effective immediately — including for hiring, training and picking suppliers, according to a new employee memo obtained by Axios.

Why it matters: The move is a strong signal to Meta employees that the company's push to make inroads with the incoming Trump administration isn't just posturing, but an ethos shift that will impact its business practices.

Context: Meta said it was changing course because the "legal and policy landscape surrounding diversity, equity and inclusion efforts in the United States is changing," per a memo by Janelle Gale, vice president of human resources.

  • The moves come just three days after Meta ended many of its efforts to fact-check and police speech on Facebook, Instagram and Threads.
  • The announcement also follows a host of public moves by tech companies and executives to align with the politics and cultural views of President-elect Trump and the MAGA movement.
State of play: Friday's memo by Gale — announcing changes to "our hiring, development and procurement practices" — was posted for Meta employees in Workplace, the company's internal communications tool.

  • "The legal and policy landscape surrounding diversity, equity and inclusion efforts in the United States is changing," Gale wrote.
  • "The Supreme Court of the United States has recently made decisions signaling a shift in how courts will approach DEI. … The term 'DEI' has also become charged, in part because it is understood by some as a practice that suggests preferential treatment of some groups over others."
The big picture: Similar moves have been made recently by other major companies, including Walmart in November and McDonald's just this week.

  • Meta last week replaced its president of global affairs, Nick Clegg, with Joel Kaplan, a prominent Republican who is now chief global affairs officer. Meta pledged a $1 million donation to Trump's inauguration — and added UFC president and CEO Dana White, a top Trump ally, to its board Monday.
Zoom in: Citing the "shifting legal and policy landscape," Meta's memo announced five big DEI pullbacks.

  • Cutting Meta's DEI team: Meta will no longer have a team focused on DEI. Maxine Williams, the company's chief diversity officer, is taking on a new role at Meta, focused on accessibility and engagement, Gale wrote.
  • Ending equity and inclusion programs: Meta will instead build programs "that focus on how to apply fair and consistent practices that mitigate bias for all, no matter your background," Gale said.
  • Sunsetting supplier diversity efforts: Meta will end efforts to source business suppliers from diverse-owned businesses. Moving forward, the company will "focus our efforts on supporting small and medium-sized businesses that power much of our economy," Gale wrote.
  • Ending the "Diverse Slate Approach" to hiring: While Meta will continue to source candidates from different backgrounds, it will no longer use the diverse-slate hiring approach, which ensures a diverse pool of candidates is considered for every open position. "We believe there are other ways to build an industry-leading workforce and leverage teams made up of world-class people from all types of backgrounds," Gale wrote.
  • Ending representation goals: Having representation goals, "can create the impression that decisions are being made based on race or gender," Gale wrote. "While this has never been our practice, we want to eliminate any impression of it," she said. She noted the company, "previously ended representation goals for women and ethnic minorities."
Zoom out: Data suggests tech employees tend to be more liberal than their employers. But over the last year, the public sentiment has shifted about corporations taking a stand on major issues like DEI, as well as environmental, social and governance issues.

  • President-elect Trump, buoyed by a growing friendship with Elon Musk, last month endorsed the H-1B visa program for foreign tech workers.
What they're saying: "Meta has the privilege to serve billions of people every day," the memo concludes.

  • "It's important to us that our products are accessible to all, and are useful in promoting economic growth and opportunity around the world. We continue to be focused on serving everyone, and building a multi-talented, industry-leading workforce from all walks of life."
https://www.axios.com/2025/01/10/meta-dei-programs-employees-trump (Archive)
 
Yeah, some might said they could still keep DEI by using another name.
They'll try..... but it won't work. (In the US at least, all bets are off in EU analogues)

What DEI had working for it was it was a new thing that took a decade of fighting in courts and labor law venues to get it on record that yes, it exists, we have the internal emails that say it exists and that it is being promoted by these companies and it is, fundamentally, illegal and discriminatory.

No rebranding of DEI can succeeded because all you have to do is say "that's DEI under a new name".

Again, I'm sure some true believers will try, but, fundamentally, DEI , in practice? In the US? Is a discredited ideology that cannot be implemented even a little without breaking the law.
 
Zuck is better at mimicking human behavior today than he was on his last appearance in JRE. He's even got a new hairstyle to make him look more like your "bro".

That being said, I still don't trust a fucking word he says. Despite his new media-friendly appearance, he still wants us to eat insects, and own nothing and be happy. Just like Bill Gates and George Soros.
 
I was listening to Zuck on JRE tonight. He claims that a lot of the demands for censorship came directly from the Biden administration. Which is true, there are e-mails that prove this. But one thing that he didn't say, and I think this is a factor in his decision, is that if it is acceptable for the Biden administration to put pressure on a tech company to censor social media because they demand it, then what stops the Trump administration from doing the same thing? So I don't buy that this was done for purely principled reasons.
 
Back
Top Bottom