Gay-Friendly Google and Political Ambiguity

Google and IBM were among the top five most gay-friendly global companies named by the International Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce this week. It’s always refreshing to hear about corporations who incorporate the L, G, B and T, and certainly businesses need to be aware that they’re being watched. Pomp and circumstance aside, such celebrations ignore the political side of international corporations and their inconsistent alliances. And they’re not always so dandy.

I’m going to pick on Google a bit here for a few reasons. First, it’s far sexier than the other tops, fellow techies BT Group and Cisco Systems, and banker Morgan Stanley, which I admit does look good in a suit. But Google was and remains a hip virtual pioneer that sprang to life after the gay rights movement was well underway, and thereby more inclined to include. I doubt it would have grown so large had it swung the other way.

Google has also reaped gay praise for actively recruiting LGBT employees, and for breaking their political silence in 2008, when co-founder Sergey Brin led the company’s fight against Proposition 8. “We do not generally take a position on issues outside of our field, especially not social issues,” Brin wrote. “[But] it is the chilling and discriminatory effect of the proposition on many of our employees that brings Google to publicly oppose Proposition 8.” The political involvement doesn’t stop there.

It’s completely natural for corporations to trickle into the political world. Name a brand and it’s likely formed a PAC. And Google’s no different. It started its political action in 2006 by founding Google NetPAC, which survives on staff donations and includes an employee advisory committee to help steer lobbying efforts.

Google’s British communications director, C-J Collins, equated the PAC with issue-driven civic engagement. “We are not interested in politics per se or getting involved in politics," he told CNN at the time. “[The Internet is] a very fast moving sector so politicians and regulators want to look closely at it so then discussions take place. Not only are we interested in getting involved in these, we think we have a responsibility." To that end, Google has been vocal in its support for net neutrality, and its philanthropic arm, Google.org, raises awareness about climate change and fights for energy reform. These examples and Google’s gay-friendly atmosphere suggest the company lives up to its informal motto, “Don’t be evil.” Of course politics is rarely black and white, and there’s always money to be followed.

When operating a PAC, a capitalist enterprise needs to diversify its “Capitol” pull. Even Fox's PAC, News America Holdings, gives to seemingly unlikely politicos like Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, so it’s not surprising that Google would donate to both Republicans and Democrats: GOP lawmakers have accepted $72,000 this election cycle, while the Democrats took in a bit more, $103,400, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. In 2008, Democrats also came out on top, taking in $156,000 from Google’s PAC. Republican lawmakers received $114,000.  It doesn’t take a brain trust to understand why the PAC would give $5,000 House Minority Leader John Boehner, while also donating $8,000 to Rep. Rick Boucher, the Democratic Chairman of the House’s Commerce, Science, and Transportation. It’s pragmatic politics, although it doesn’t always make sense. Boehner, for example, has lobbied against net neutrality, which he views as a government takeover. And the lines get even more blurred when you look through a gay-friendly lens.

Boehner of course has a less-than-amiable relationship with the gays. He’s voted against every piece of gay rights legislation presented to him, and has been an outspoken opponent of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’s repeal. Nor are the other GOP recipients any better: Rep. Eric Cantor and Rep. Lee Terry both voted against the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, and Sen. Jim DeMint called gay marriage “destructive” to society. To be sure, “traditionally gay friendly” legislators like Sens. Chuck Schumer and Barbara Boxer have procured some Google dough, but supporting the right-wing leaders who want to route us out makes me wonder how far we can go in celebrating “gay-friendly” allies. More than that, though, these contradictions provide an oft-forgotten lesson.

Politics, like all relationships, can get complicated. On one hand, a venerated ally like Google can be the most gay-friendly entity on earth. One another, there’s a lot of back room deals going on. It’s best to keep an eye on Washington, not just for the sake of transparency, but because it proves that sometimes, in this imperfect world, even the best of us have to work with our opponents.

Image credit: sonicbloom's Flickr