Tim Cook: Apple will release diversity data ‘at some point’

“At this week’s Sun Valley conference in Idaho, Apple CEO Tim Cook told Bloomberg reporters that Apple will release diversity data on its workforce,” Mark Gurman reports for 9to5Mac.

“Cook did not specify when this data release would come, but this is the first confirmation from Apple that the company is planning to release such data,” Gurman reports. “A CNN report from March detailed Apple as one of the several technology giants that have objected to releasing the information.”

Gurman reports, “‘We’ll release the information at some point,’ Cook said at the annual Allen & Co. media and technology conference in Sun Valley, Idaho, without giving a timetable for a disclosure. ‘We are more focused on actions.'”

Read more in the full article here.

Related articles:
Jesse Jackson targets tech’s lack of diversity; sends letter to Apple, Google, HP, others – March 19, 2014
Apple changes bylaws after facing criticism about lack of diversity on board – January 9, 2014


  1. Why? Diversity is nice, but if they alter their hiring practices away from hiring the best qualified people and toward a goal of being “diverse”, they’re screwing themselves, and the people looking for a job. I’m really sick and tired of all of this worrying about peoples’ race, sexual orientation, religion, etc. We’re all just people. Can’t we just live with that and not worry about someone being different from us? Focusing on diversity is just creating division.

    1. If a workforce is mostly white guys, study after study has shown that they are NOT neutrally hiring “the best qualified people.” They may not intend to discriminate against non-white-guys, but they can’t help it.

      Ignoring hidden biases doesn’t get rid of them – it lets them fester. Focusing on diversity doesn’t _create_ division – it reveals what is actually there and tries to fix it. The whole “color-blind” theory is something that people who aren’t negatively affected by prejudice say to avoid having to deal with a real problem. It’s easy to ignore prejudice when it isn’t being used against you.

      The way to get to a world where what you suggest (“all just people”) is to face the problems and fix them, not ignore them and ignore the negative affect they have on people who aren’t in the privileged groups. That’s just lazy and wrong.

      1. Not buying that at all… Where are the studies that show how often “diversity” results in reverse discrimination? I am far from bigoted… I now own a company and can tell you with 100% certainty that I hire the most qualified, period. I worked for a printing company years ago and had a lesbian boss and her partner was the department head, there were definitely more gay’s and lesbians in that department than the one would imagine… The fact that half of them had no business holding their jobs (they sucked) has nothing to do with their sexual preference they were just not qualified, but that is what we got with our “diversity”. btw that company is no longer in business

      2. You missed my point. How sad. There will always be prejudice. No one can stop that. What we can stop is the hate mongers from stirring up more racial strife. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton have become millionaires off of stirring up hate. I admire Apple a lot, and I will admire them even more for the great things that they do behind the scenes rather than announcing everything. And by the way… I worked for Apple, and I’ve been to their corporate headquarters. They were diverse then, and they still are. There’s no need to play this politically correct game.

        1. No, I got your point. I just think you are absolutely wrong. You make assumptions like “if they alter their hiring practices away from hiring the best qualified people” – I believe that most people have subconscious prejudices that keep them from doing that. In other words, the diversity goals are to counter-balance the hidden biases that unfairly shift hiring decisions towards straight white cis men.

          My point was that I disagreed with your point, and then explained why I disagreed. I also disagree with your idea that the best way to improve racial tension is to ignore it. I made that clear, but you didn’t seem to hear me.

          People are being hurt by policies and by hidden biases that hold them back and make everything harder. The people who are NOT being hurt (and are perhaps being unfairly helped by those biases) have no moral right to say “ignoring this problem is better than confronting it, because confronting it would make me sad. If we just ignore it, maybe it will just go away.” It is really bad to try to silence the people who complain about the horribly racist things that happen to minorities in this country.
          People in the South during the civil rights movement in the 50’s and 60’s called Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr an “agitator” or “trouble-maker” because he was calling out injustice. It’s disturbing to see that attitude continues today. People who point out injustice are NOT “hate mongers stirring up racial strife.” They are pointing out racial strife that already exists and saying “This is not OK – this must be fixed!”

          I hope you can see the difference, and understand my point that saying “if I pretend there is no racism, that is better than doing something about it” is the equivalent of saying “I’m OK with racism destroying other people’s lives, because I am not suffering – they are.” I’d like to think that many people just aren’t realizing that is what they are saying, and if they listen, they might understand that ignoring racism is implicitly supporting it to continue. Then, if they are good people, they will change their minds and say instead “racism and discrimination are unfair and cannot be allowed to continue, even if confronting the problem makes me sad/uncomfortable.” I hope you are one of those good people who just didn’t realize that yet.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.