Yes, successful investigative journalists work with documents. But do they become investigative journalists because they want to work with documents? Or do they become investigative journalists because they want to uncover the truth behind stories, and documents are simply tools used as part of that?
Compare documents to cars. There are many people who like cars, and because of that seek out a career where they get to work with cars and don't really car what the cars are being used for.
Does it matter? A major component of investigative journalism is following document trails and understanding records/laws. If you don't have the stomach for it, your chances for success are greatly diminished.
It's not different from tech. Programming could be reduced to a "tool" for success, too.
"So I went to business school, and eventually I landed myself in the kind of career that I was happy to do on weekends, and nights, and most of my other time... My field, policy journalism...."
So for whatever reason, it seems that in her mind, journalism is less about working with "things" than tech work is.
this is not true at all. Maybe a WNBA could score a few points here and there. But even the worst NBA player is better than the best WNBA because of the biological difference between men and women. The women's national hockey team and soccer team scrimmage regularly against 16 boys and get beat by those boys. The difference is magnitude when a full grown man actually did scrimmage against them.
But to relate to the central topic, the biological difference between men and women in programming is insignificant.
Hard to take this piece seriously. I've worked in tech and in journalism. Women are decently-represented in investigative journalism [0], and being successful in that means being highly motivated to work, 7 days a week for long hours, with "inanimate objects" such as documents, legal codes, and Lexis-Nexis, e.g. Jane Mayer [1] and Lucy Morgan [2]. Perhaps the reason why the OP can't recall of many women at her workplace building fiber-channel networks in their basement over the weekend is that:
1) It's rare even for men to do that. I went through engineering school; there were students like that, some of whom would later go on to excel. But many students such as myself weren't as obsessive yet were able to be successful and confident too.
2) There weren't many women in her workplace period.
Maybe the implication is that women can get obsessed with something like journalism because it's not the "inanimate objects" they're obsessed with, but the real-life people who are impacted. OK. I don't work at Google but I imagine that is a quality they would want in their workforce if they hope to make their computing services integral and ubiquitous to human existence.
I can identify with the OP's selection-bias. As a Vietnamese-American, I've gotten a few surprised responses from other Vietnamese about being a journalist. Part of that may be because there aren't many Vietnamese relative to other ethnic groups in America. And to a relatively poor ethnic group, a poor-paying field like journalism isn't super attractive to Vietnamese immigrant parents. There aren't a ton of (well-known) Vietnamese journalist heroes to emulate either; none so far have won a Pulitzer (in editorial journalism, at least). But why I became interested in journalist is easy: my high school had a great program, and it was fun.
From my vantage point, the idea that women could succeed and enjoy tech is far less hypothetical. For starters, women are represented well in STEM (just not computer science), and tech is a highly lucrative field today. But more importantly, unlike aspiring Vietnamese-American journalists, women have actual heroes and paragons of the field to look-up to. Not just the long-dead, such as Ada Lovelace and Admiral Grace Hopper. The engineer who (among many other huge accomplishments) came up with the very concept of "software engineering" was a woman [3].
I know the memo author's and the OP's point is not that women can't at all exceed in engineering. But the situation isn't that women have sometimes done well with computers, like a few WNBA players might be able to give NBA players a tough challenge. The situation with computers is that women have been pioneers. The memo's author does not provide sufficient evidence for us to believe that biological factors are what make engineering unappealing to women. So efforts to make engineering appealing to women are not just done out of an obligatory guilt-trip, but could be essential to a company's continued success and innovation.
[0] http://www.theinvestigativefund.org/blog/1761/investigative_...
[1] http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2010/08/30/covert-operatio...
[2] http://archives.cjr.org/united_states_project/lucy_morgan_in...
[3] https://medium.com/@verne/margaret-hamilton-the-engineer-who...