Are you really trying to gaslight me here? Why not address my argument instead?
>But had his managers asked, they would have learned that Speagle had a history of anxiety and depression, and that he might not be suited well for the role. No one did.
Perhaps when he realized he was going to be viewing graphic content for the entire workday- he might have reconsidered whether the job was right for him? The framing is clearly trying to pin the blame on the company and/or facebook and while they definitely misrepresented the job (and the company sounds like they committed a lot of workplace violations in general),no one was forced him to be there.
And then he got laid off, he didn't even quit on his own.
This is an argument entirely unrelated to the article at hand which specifically calls out how terrible these working conditions are and how Facebook perpetuates it.