Google Rolling Out Function Forcing ‘Inclusive Language’ on Users

Google Rolling Out Function Forcing ‘Inclusive Language’ on Users

Google started rolling out a new function called “assistive writing” that prompts users to use inclusive language.

I’ve noticed this in Grammarly. It’s irritating. From The Telegraph:

Among the words it objects to are “landlord” – which Google says “may not be inclusive to all readers” and should be changed to “property owner” or “proprietor” – and “mankind”, which it wants changed to “humankind”.

The tool suggests more gender-inclusive phrasing, such as changing “policemen” to “police officers”, and replacing “housewife” with “stay-at-home-spouse”.

But it also objects to the technical term “motherboard” – used for a printed circuit board containing the principal components of a computer or other device.

If a writer uses these and other terms a message pops up stating “Inclusive warning. Some of these words may not be inclusive to all readers. Consider using different words.”

What if we’re talking only about policemen or firemen? If the group contains women, use police officers or firefighters. Why would anyone call a man who stays at home a housewife? While checking this piece, Grammarly suggested I use police officers and firefighters.

Google Docs has not given me the assistive writing tool yet. I opened and tried to use sex-based words (don’t say gender) and didn’t get a prompt from Google.

At least with Grammarly, I choose to allow it to look at my writing. The assistive writing tool is automatically turned on, which means Google knows what you’re typing:

Silkie Carlo, the director of Big Brother Watch, told The Telegraph: “Google’s new word warnings aren’t assistive, they’re deeply intrusive. With Google’s new assistive writing tool, the company is not only reading every word you type but telling you what to type.

“This speech-policing is profoundly clumsy, creepy and wrong, often reinforcing bias. Invasive tech like this undermines privacy, freedom of expression and increasingly freedom of thought.”

But it goes farther than sex-based words:

At Motherboard, senior staff writer Lorenzo Franceschi-Bicchierai typed “annoyed” and Google suggested he change it to “angry” or “upset” to “make your writing flow better.” Being annoyed is a completely different emotion than being angry or upset—and “upset” is so amorphous, it could mean a whole spectrum of feelings—but Google is a machine, while Lorenzo’s a writer.

I mean…

Experimenting… at least they're open to measured critique pic.twitter.com/bPJO1AFMzq

— Katie Way (@k80way) April 19, 2022

Samantha Cole at Vice is all for inclusive writing. But Cole points out the problems with Google’s new tool:

But words do mean things; calling landlords “property owners” is almost worse than calling them “landchads,” and half as accurate. It’s catering to people like Howard Schultz who would prefer you not call him a billionaire, but a “person of means.” On a more extreme end, if someone intends to be racist, sexist, or exclusionary in their writing, and wants to draft that up in a Google document, they should be allowed to do that without an algorithm attempting to sanitize their intentions and confuse their readers. This is how we end up with dog whistles.

Thinking and writing outside of binary terms like “mother” and “father” can be useful, but some people are mothers, and the person writing about them should know that. Some websites (and computer parts) are just called Motherboard. Trying to shoehorn self-awareness, sensitivity, and careful editing into people’s writing using machine learning algorithms—already deeply flawed, frequently unintelligent pieces of technology—is misguided. Especially when it’s coming from a company that’s grappling with its own internal reckoning in inclusivity, diversity, and mistreatment of workers who stand up for better ethics in AI.

I’m all for not forcing racists to water down their language. Let them be blunt, so I know to avoid them. Changing their words doesn’t change their heart and mind.

But actual racists and hateful people are the only ones who need to change. Those of us who understand real science don’t need to change. What might seem insensitive to others is not insensitive to the vast majority. But hey we must cater and coddle the very few who throw a temper tantrum because someone used policemen instead of police officers.

But then there’s the grammar aspect of it all. It happens to me with Grammarly. When it suggests a fix that doesn’t need it I accidentally press “change.” Or someone might allow the tool to change everything, leaving them with a piece watered down and filled with words that change the meaning of sentences.

Cole hopes Google will improve its assistive writing tool as more people respond to it. Something tells me Google will only fix the vocabulary concerns, not the wokeness concerns.

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.