Use these questions at town halls and AMAs or in any other venue where you
can confront decision makers, like CVPs.
-
When considering our customers and abiding by our ethical standards,
where do we draw the line when deciding to stop serving a customer?
-
Why has Microsoft not denied the recent allegations in the Guardian
and +972 Magazine about enabling mass surveillance in Palestine?
-
If the current investigation by Covington & Burling LLP shows that
Azure is being used for mass surveillance of Palestinians, exactly
what actions will be taken?
-
The recent protests on campus demonstrate the depth of frustration
felt by Microsoft workers and community members about the use of
Microsoft tech to enable war crimes in Gaza. Will Microsoft finally
heed these urgent calls and act immediately to cut ties with customers
who violate our own human rights standards and Acceptable Use
policies?
-
Why did Microsoft choose to remove community and worker protests on
campus instead of attempting to engage with the community’s concerns?
Do you believe that policing our campus is a more effective way of
dealing with these widespread concerns than simply acknowledging the
plain truth of Microsoft’s complicity with Israel’s genocide and
making a change?
-
Why does Microsoft continue to repress critical speech among workers
and protests on campus in spite of the harmful impact this has on
employee morale and the fact that this repression will not make
criticism disappear?
-
What steps has the SLT taken to address the legal liability associated
with allowing Microsoft services to be used to enable war crimes and
other circumventions of human rights laws?
-
In spite of Microsoft’s repeated efforts to silence employees who are
outspoken against Microsoft’s involvement in genocide, negative public
opinion has only grown and protests have escalated. Will Microsoft
change course instead of continuing this failed policy of repression?
-
Evidence in reporting by The Guardian and +972 Magazine shows that the
Israeli military has not abided by Microsoft’s Acceptable Use policies
and human rights commitment in its use of Microsoft services. Why has
this customer been allowed to continue using our services in spite of
these flagrant violations?
-
What is the SLT’s response to the UN report condemning Microsoft of
genocide profiteering and calling on the company to cut ties with
Israel?
-
Though multiple investigations and reports over the past 20 months
have named Microsoft’s technical enablement of the Israel’s genocide,
Microsoft has yet to deny these accusations and has instead offered a
non-denial of “we haven’t found evidence to prove this”. Why should
the public and Microsoft employees not view this as an evasive PR
tactic and a failure to prevent Microsoft services from being used to
enable a genocide?
-
What is your response to Israeli army sources describing Microsoft as
“having a footprint in all major military infrastructure”?
-
Why did Satya see fit to personally meet with the head of Unit 8200,
Yossi Sariel, in 2021 in spite of that military unit already having a
documented track record of conducting illegal mass surveillance of
Palestinian civilians?
-
Exactly who conducted the first “independent investigation” that
Microsoft claims did not find evidence of Microsoft tech being used in
the harm of Gazan civilians? Why has Microsoft not provided any
evidence of this investigation result?
-
What is your response to the head of the IDF’s Center of Computing and
Information Systems stating that without data and computing “accurate
targeting would not be possible” given the public knowledge and your
admission that the IDF hosts data on Microsoft servers?
-
Whatever they use our tech for, should we have any business
relationship with a government that has killed at least 18,430
children in 22 months and is currently starving hundreds of thousands
more?
-
How often does Satya or other members of the SLT meet with Israeli
military officials?
-
We know that the Israeli army purchases “extended engineering
services” from Microsoft, which means the Microsoft Personnel and
engineers are deeply involved with the development of systems and
products used by the Israeli Military. Given this fact, how is it
possible that Microsoft was not aware of the use of our services to
surveil and kill Palestinians?
-
Given the well-documented war crimes committed by the Israeli
military, is there any part of the Israeli government and military
that Microsoft would deny service to? Any contracts with the Israeli
Military that are being reconsidered?
-
Did Microsoft choose to host Israel’s illegal surveillance and
targeting data on Palestinians on our Netherlands servers instead of
Germany or France because the latter two countries have regulations
that require human rights review of how services are used? And if so,
doesn’t data held within Netherlands services still come under the
purview of GDPR which provides data subjects the right to have their
data deleted?
-
Microsoft recommends us to use “proper channels” when we raise
concerns about Microsoft’s Cloud and AI partnerships with the Israeli
Military. But when we use the channels that we are encouraged to use
as part of our SBC training - including ReportItNow and business
conduct hotline ([email protected]) - they are closed without
proper explanation. In some cases, the filings are referred to HR, who
happen to be in a hiring & firing capacity over us, thus violating
the spirit of anti-retaliation and identity-protection of employees
who raise concerns. Can Leadership clarify what exactly is meant by
“proper channels”?
-
Does Microsoft have any formal procedures to ensure that its customers
are abiding by its ethics and acceptable use policies, or does it wait
for public media reports to investigate violations?
-
In February 2025, AP News reported that “The Israeli military uses
Microsoft Azure to compile information gathered through mass
surveillance, which it transcribes and translates, including phone
calls, texts and audio messages, according to an Israeli intelligence
officer who works with the systems.” Why did Microsoft not investigate
this illegal use of Azure to enable mass surveillance until August
when it was reported on again by The Guardian?