First of all, for it to be considered factual it has to be confirmed.
I’m not claiming it’s not true, I’m just saying I haven’t come across a confirmation yet (in regards to the presentation being authentic at least, IBM’s CEO’s explicit implication of quotas and firings would be damning regardless).
Do you mean implicitly?
Being completely honest I didn’t watch the entirety of all linked videos.
It does seem that the ideas expressed might align with the released document but I didn’t see explicit confirmation. But if he indeed did and I missed it could you please point me to the timestamp of the video?
That said, even presenting facts doesn’t necessarily exempt one from bias…
I could create a topic presenting facts supporting XY position, then silence everyone expressing a differing opinion even while not opposing the facts I presented.
That’s why I tried to be explicit about “moderation”.
Why would you assume that?
I’m not an American and I’m not very familiar with US Law, but a Federal Complaint being filed would suggest there is grounds of legal implications, no?