Continues to comply with Trump

Meta is now also ending its diversity programs

Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg is on friendly terms with Donald Trump.

(Bild: facebook.com/zuck)

A few days after the end of its fact-checking program in the USA, Meta has also announced the termination of its internal diversity programs. They would be discontinued "in light of a changing legal and political landscape", according to an internal announcement on Friday. Apple, on the other hand, is defending itself against corresponding shareholder demands.

Conservative politicians have been criticizing such programmes for some time and argue, among other things, that they do not overcome divisions between different population groups, but rather reinforce them.

Programs for diversity, equality and inclusion - abbreviated as DEI - are intended to ensure diversity among students and lecturers, particularly at US universities. Numerous large companies in the US have also initiated such programs, particularly in light of the rise of the Black Lives Matter movement in the summer of 2020.

Following Donald Trump's victory in the US presidential election, several US corporations, including supermarket giant Walmart, car manufacturer Ford and whisky producer Jack Daniel's, have already announced the scaling back of diversity programs.

Maxine Williams, previously employed by Meta in the role of Chief Diversity Officer, will now take on a new role that focuses on "accessibility and engagement", it was reported. In addition, a program under which preference was given to companies that took diversity criteria into account when selecting suppliers will also be terminated. Meta will continue to hire candidates with diverse backgrounds.

Apple defends diversity initiatives
Apple, on the other hand, called on its shareholders to vote against a motion to end its diversity programs at the upcoming Annual General Meeting at the end of February. The shareholders justify their motion by arguing that the diversity requirements could lead to discrimination against employees and lawsuits. They referred to two rulings by the US Supreme Court.

Apple countered that the proposal was an impermissible interference in the company's day-to-day business. As far as legal risks are concerned, the company has well-established procedures in place to minimize them.