The Cowards at Microsoft

--Edward

via bloggy
~~~~~~~~~~

UPDATE: I note this mainly because KipEsquire took me (and other blogs) to task for taking seriously what he called a "local not-quite-newspaper..."  who ran a story that was a "collection of rants by low-level, and in many instances anonymous, Microsoft employees who can neither speak for the company nor produce any memos, emails, or any other hard proof of, well, anything." Now that The New York Times has confirmed the story, are ya a little less skeptical Kip?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Ken Hutcherson may very well cut an imposing figure. He was, after all, a football player with the Cowboys, the Chargers and the Seahawks. But to think this one man would walk into Microsoft's Redmond, WA, corporate headquarters and blackmail this international behemoth into withdrawing its support for a state-wide gay civil rights bill is impressive indeed.

House Bill 1515 would protect gays and lesbians from discrimination in employment, housing, banking, insurance, and other matters by adding sexual orientation to a state law which already bars discrimination on the basis of race, religion, national origin, gender, marital status, and mental or physical handicap. More than a dozen states currently have similar laws on the books, but the effort to pass the legislation in Washington State has been a struggle. Some form of the legislation has been introduced in the state legislature for 29 consecutive years; for the last 10 years, [State Rep. Ed ] Murray, an influential legislator who chairs the House Transportation Committee, has sponsored the bill.

The list of high-profile companies that endorsed the bill this year reads like a who's who of the Pacific Northwest corporate world. It includes the Boeing Company, Nike, Coors Brewing, Qwest Communications, Washington Mutual, Hewlett-Packard, Corbis, Battelle Memorial Institute, Microsoft cofounder Paul Allen's Vulcan Inc., and others. And as late as February 1, Microsoft, which issued a letter in support of the bill last year, appeared poised to do so again.

On that date, two gay Microsoft employees, Jean McCarthy, a business development manager, and Gregory S. McCurdy, a senior attorney, testified in the house State Government Operations and Accountability committee in favor of the bill. Asked if they were making their statements as official representatives of the company, McCurdy informed the committee that they were appearing in a personal capacity, but added that "the company has taken a position in support of the bill." He further stated that DeLee Shoemaker, an aide to former Governor Gary Locke who now handles state-level government relations for Microsoft, had issued a letter in support of the bill. "We are going to be providing copies of that letter to the committee," he said.

Enter Hutcherson, who heads a local mega-church. He met with Microsoft officials and threatened a national boycott of its products if they didn't change their stance on the legislation. Apparently he was very convincing. At an April 4 meeting that Microsoft officials warned was supposed to be confidential (but one attendee later reported to the stranger.com) Bradford L. Smith, Microsoft's senior vice president, general counsel, and corporate secretary, told gay staffers the corporation had caved, and because of the threat would declare itself neutral on the legislation.

Murray, a gay Democrat representing Capitol Hill and the prime sponsor of the bill, confirmed that Smith also told him about the pressure from Hutcherson during an awkward and at times heated March 29 conference call in which they discussed the company's decision to end its active support for the bill.

The bill has, for the third year in a row, been passed by the Washington state House. The previous two times, and possibly this time again, it failed in the Senate. Hutcherson keeps campaigning against the bill predominantly on the themes that it's offensive to God and African Americans:

During the committee hearing on the House bill, Pastor Ken Hutcherson of Antioch Bible Church in Redmond said that as a black man he was "appalled" by the bill because he does not believe gays and lesbians have suffered the same prejudice black Americans have.

Hutcherson seems to deserve solid marks for consistency in his opinions, so I'll give him credit there. I don't respect his opinions (and for a man of God, he's far too obsessed with money for my comfort), but even as ambitious as he appears, he is consistent. In an opinion piece printed in the Seattle Times (registration required) he reiterated this theme about the difference between the struggle for gay rights and that of African-Americans:

It has been said loudly and proudly that gay marriage is a civil-rights issue. If that's the case, then gays would be the new African Americans. I'm here to tell you now, and hopefully for the last time, that the gay community is not the new "African-American" community.

Even the Rev. Jesse Jackson stated that the fight of gays and lesbians wanting to marry should not be compared to the fight African Americans faced for civil rights. The comparison of the plight of the gay community to slavery is a stretch; remember, gays were never called "three-fifths" human, according to the Constitution, and they did not require the Voting Rights Act to gain the same democratic rights as whites.

This is, of course, a strawman argument (no one is arguing that gays are slaves, and the African-American struggle doesn't absolve anyone from identifying with other minorities struggling for equality). This approach strikes me as designed to earn him credibility and sympathy so he can better dole out the hatred in his message with impunity. But he did bring down the Goliath Microsoft, this David of Evangelical politics. In the arena of politics, there's really nothing to criticize in that but Microsoft's soft underbelly. Lame geek cowards.

Comments

[bob mcmanus]

Incomprehensible. The blogosphere is dumfounded, with some speculation that there may be a relation to intellectual property rights ambitions of Microsoft.

But I have seen no evidence that Microsoft was in danger of alienating a Washington DC or national Christian Right constituency. Just mysterious.

[Edward]

with some speculation that there may be a relation to intellectual property rights ambitions of Microsoft.

Come on Bob...share your sources.

[Ugh]

What calculus does Microsoft go through to pick one position or another on this issue? That is, what are the things which Microsoft looks to in deciding which position, for, against, or neutral, is the right position for Microsoft?

[Edward]

What calculus does Microsoft go through to pick one position or another on this issue? That is, what are the things which Microsoft looks to in deciding which position, for, against, or neutral, is the right position for Microsoft?

According the Stranger aricle, they're now re-evaluating that:

Smith told attendees that he had made the decision with the intention of initiating a broader review of policy relating to Microsoft's participation in social issues. "He said there was no consistent way to determine when and why we would engage in a social issue. He wanted to turn the issue into an abstract question of formulating policy," the attendee says. While Smith said he personally hoped the legislation passed, he said the company needed to "pause" temporarily until it figured out how it ought to engage with such hot-button matters.

Some employees accepted Smith's explanation and offered words of support. A larger group, however, "responded with anger, disappointment, and shame," the employee told The Stranger. "People said, 'I'm disappointed in you. I'm ashamed for Microsoft. This is impossible to explain to friends and family why Microsoft would take this position,'" the employee recalled. Asked at the meeting if he would change his mind, Smith said he would not. He also refused a request that the company publicly reiterate Microsoft's own internal anti-discrimination policies, the participant says.

I too am dumbfounded by this. Unless Hutcherson has something on someone, of as Bob indicates there may be other ambitions at play here, this makes no sense.

[Phil]

By Hutcherson's reasoning, women's suffrage, Japanese internment and the ADA were not civil rights issues either. Shame that a man's horizons can be so limited.

And not to disparage the experiences of enslaved blacks -- indeed, I cannot even begin to wrap my mind around such a thing -- but people have a perpetual misunderstanding of the three-fifths clause. Whatever its philosophical, moral and legal implications, it never said "a black person is three-fifths human." It allowed Southern states to have more representation in the House than they otherwise would have by counting a proportion of their slave population for that purpose.

[Edward]

Nevermind...the damn thing failed anyway (registration required):

The Washington Senate on Thursday rejected the so-called gay civil rights bill by one vote, 25-24.

The legislation, a longtime goal of the state's politically active gay community, appeared dead earlier this month when a Senate majority sent it to the Judiciary Committee, where it was bottled up as a key deadline came and went.

On Thursday, the Senate narrowly approved a procedural move by Democrats to exempt the measure from the cutoff, and allow it to come up for a vote. Senators also voted to pull the bill, House Bill 1515, from Judiciary so it could be debated by the full Senate.

I'm out here...gotta go check on apartment prices in Holland.

[Ugh]

Could be that MS is worried that its support of the issue would cause repurcussions in the R-controlled Congress on copyright laws (where I read somewhere today that MS wants a change that would outlaw the GPL which would eliminate the threat from Linux).

But don't they have to balance numerous concerns, such as what their support might cost in terms of customers, what their lack of support might cost, the effect on employee morale, politically imposed economic repurcussions (for either position), etc.? Are they cowards if their calculation is "it would be better for MS if we were 'neutral' rather than 'for' on this bill"?

And, on a completely different topic, isn't there something dismaying for the campaign finance people that the general counsel of MS is having conference calls with the sponsor of the bill on MS's support for the bill? Just asking.

[Macallan]

I have to agree with you Edward. If Microsoft on their own decided to support the legislation, it is pretty cowardly to back down over a boycott threat. Of all the companies in the world who could survive a boycott… a pseudo monopoly has to be at the top of the list.

[Barry]

Ugh, considering their market share, dominant position in some cash cow areas, and huge stash of cash, I find it hard to believe that it's short-term money (as in a boycott). Threats of anti-trust sound more likely.

The potential of using the US government to crush OS software is really plausible, since it would fit into the mindset of both Microsoft management and the GOP, IMHO.

[bob mcmanus]

"Come on Bob...share your sources."

just some vague comments over at Yglesias by "cranky observer" very similar to what ugh said about GPL at 5:36 above.

I was flailing in the dark. I don't see the Christian Right being a threat to Microsoft or caring much about this one battle in a coastal state. They supported the bill for umpteen years and now changed because of one black minister?

I mean, Coors supported the bill.

[Gromit]

My prediction: at E3 President Bush will appear in a live video feed from the Oval Office to endorse the Xbox 2.

[carpeicthus]

*pets iMac*

[Bernard Yomtov]

This is utterly bizarre behavior by Microsoft.

[notyou]

Outlaw the GPL?

Based on what, exactly?

[Slartibartfast]

The GPL, outlawed on what basis? It's not in any way related to Microsoft intellectual property. It's hardly even a threat to Microsoft, at least not at present. Even so, threat of competition doesn't equate at all with copyright infringement or theft of IP.

I think this is just a rumor, and not a very well-thought one at that.

[liberal japonicus]

I agree with the not well thought out part, but don't know about rumor part.

link and link

Not particularly new, and I hope that Washington State Congressman Adam Smith (D 9th district) is not linked to this current legislation (I know, it's state versus national, so I admit this is a roll of tinfoil in search of a hatter)but I can't find any stance on gay rights by Smith. Chas is in that neck of the woods, any insight to this?

[Slartibartfast]

Just read the first link. And I'd thought that Congresscritters couldn't impress me less.

Sheesh. What morons.

[The42ndGuy]

That should end the formatting then?

[Slartibartfast]

A trackback html fornicate-up. Darn you to heck, kipesquire!

[blah]

"Boeing Company, Nike, Coors Brewing, Qwest Communications, Washington Mutual, Hewlett-Packard, Corbis, Battelle Memorial Institute, Microsoft cofounder Paul Allen's Vulcan Inc., and others."

So was Microsoft the only one threatened or were they the only one that caved? If it's the former, then I would guess that Hutcherson either grouped up with a significant number shareholders or maybe even he or his church owns enough shares to cause trouble. A boycott? Did MS really think he was going to get alot of his flock to buy Macs or switch to Linux? I'm just not buying this.

As far as the outlawing the GPL and crushing OS, I'm not seeing that either. I'm pretty sure some other large tech companies would take exception and OS popularity is growing in defense related R&D. If MS wants to risk an alignment of IBM, Novell and parts of the military industrial complex, all I have to say is: HEH!

[liberal japonicus]

thanks the42ndguy for the html correx (though I will note that I am embarassed about typing your handle :^0)

[Slartibartfast]

OS popularity is growing in defense related R&D

We're using Linux heavily at LockMart, just as a point of reference. We still use Windoze quite a lot, but Microsoft's software development tools aren't for everyone (as well as being costly), and there's some pretty decent tools for Linux that actually work better and more consistently.

That said, the Linux install running on my workstation is the LEAST stable and reliable of any I've ever installed on any of my own machines. Could be a combination of not-quite-polished kernel and unusual hardware (dual Xeon), but you know something's amiss when "kill -9" doesn't have any effect. Ever.

[KipEsquire]

Did you actually read the Times article? It merely reports the basic facts without all the biased hyperbole -- namely that a bunch of people, many anonymous, and all of whom have ulterior motives, are asking people to connect dots that Microsoft says are not connectable. So yes, I remain even more skeptical. The Times reported it the way it should have been reported -- objectively and without the histrionics.

[Edward]

Nice try KipEsquire, but here's what you wrote:

Who could possibly believe that such a "behemoth" (the Stranger's rather un-journalistic term) is about to be intimidated by some third-rate Bible-thumper?

The Stranger may be selling, but I'm not buying.

Here's what the NYTimes wrote:

Dr. Hutcherson, pastor of the Antioch Bible Church, who has organized several rallies opposing same-sex marriage here and in Washington, D.C., said he threatened in those meetings to organize a national boycott of Microsoft products.

After that, "they backed off," the pastor said Thursday in a telephone interview. "I told them I was going to give them something to be afraid of Christians about," he said.

Now, even though Microsoft is denying there's any connection (and if there are "ulterior motives" to consider here, you might want to start with theirs), the person who the employees feel was responsible for the reversal agrees with the employees. The only party that disagrees is the corporation taking heat for the reversal.

[Anarch]

Could be a combination of not-quite-polished kernel and unusual hardware (dual Xeon), but you know something's amiss when "kill -9" doesn't have any effect. Ever.

What you need, my friend, is the kill command that goes all the way up to 11...

[Slartibartfast]

Heh. Yeah, that ought to do it.

[sidereal]

"local not-quite-newspaper."

The Stranger? Not quite what? It's a free weekly, but I'd take it over the Times or the Seattle Weekly any day. Plus the I Saw Us are hilarious.

Mmm. . .kill. I prefer the syntax 'kill -KILL'. It wins with vehemence.

[Slartibartfast]

Is that the Arlo Guthrie version of kill?

[sidereal]

I think it's the Michael Myers version.

[Phillip J. Birmingham]

It wins with vehemence.

Hah. For vehemence, try telinit 0.

[dutchmarbel]

I'm out here...gotta go check on apartment prices in Holland

skyhigh on the whole... One of the reasons of our current high emigration figures (hugh numbers go live in Germany or Belgium).

But in the very near future Spain might be a good option (one of the few countries I'd seriously consider living in if I ever wanted to leave the Netherlands).

[Richard Silverstein]

MS did a cold, hard calculation & worried that with the growing strength of the evangelical movement that the latter could do the company more harm than offending gays & lesbians would. Plus, anyone with half a brain can see how evangelical histrionics in the Schiavo case mesmerized the nation for weeks. MS worried that somehow the same might happen to them.

What a pitiful performance by MS! So much for principle and adhering to your own stated corporate policies & objectives expressing support for gay rights & diversity.

I also thought Kip Esquire's post was disgraceful basically saying "All hail big, beneficent Microsoft--they deserve the benefit of the doubt."

I've written a post on the subject (click on my name hyperlink).