This article is book ended by some legitimate concerns about sexual harassment in tech, but the stuff about meritocracy sandwiched in the middle is pretty disturbing.

You can't say something isn't a meritocracy just because it doesn't accurately reflect population demographics.  The NBA is a meritocracy, and it's mostly black with some Eastern and Southern Europeans thrown in. In general, white North Americans, Latinos and Asians don't have much representation....but that didn't stop Jeremy Lin or Steve Nash or Yao Ming or Manu Ginobli. The NBA is a meritocracy - if you can play, you're in.

The examples cited to 'disprove' that this is a meritocracy, don't do that at all. There is no control - they basically just say that this is not a meritocracy because it's mostly male and mostly white, without proving that non-male non-whites are any better. If you want to argue that lack of diversity is a problem, that's fair...but that is irrelevant to the concept of a meritocracy.