Typically in organizations this large, trouble makers are "promoted out" so as to minimize the damage they can do to the organization while minimizing the risk of any legal blow back from an outright firing. I think the author here understands what is happening to him and seems to be describing these events with a sense of melancholy or sadness about being removed from a project or product that he cared deeply about.
I read much more of a cheeky tone, mixed with perhaps a dash of melancholy. I think the tone here is more one of jaded skepticism that his new role is more important than his old one. And he's probably right, from a certain point of view. But that probably means he should have declined the promotion.
He admits that he was probably on the chopping block for quite a while at the end. And yet, he calls the essay "Firing Frankness"? Comes off as bitter, to be totally frank.
I agree. The author is clearly detached and saddened by events; any perceived "tone-deafness" probably has more to due with the individual reader's jealousy or envy of his station than with the overall story he's telling.
