Challenge to Google's Eric and Shuman: Be real men, don't selectively hide the 'world's information'

Eric and Shuman at Google: If you are committed to organizing the world’s information, and making it universally accessible, then why do you covertly allude to me as “a blogger

Eric and Shuman at Google: If you are committed to organizing the world’s information, and making it universally accessible, then why do you covertly allude to me as “a blogger” and why do you not provide the world with a link to my “blog post?,” which you do not identify, although it is the subject of your latest post at Google Blog?

To the World:

“a blogger” that Shuman Ghosemajumder, Business Product Manager for Trust & Safety, alludes to in his 7/14/2006 07:58:00 AM post at the Google Blog, “Let click fraud happen”? Uh, no”, apparently on behalf of Eric Schmidt, Google CEO, is me, Donna Bogatin.

Donna Bogatin
ZDNet Digital Micro-Markets Blog
http://blogs.zdnet.com/micro-markets

To the World:

The “blog post” that Google discusses, attempts to rebut, but doesn’t identify, is my July 9, 2006, post:
“Google CEO on click fraud: “let it happen” is perfect economic solution”
http://blogs.zdnet.com/micro-markets/?p=219

To the World:

Google’s indignant tone is not backed up by anything, except the $122 billion market cap over valuation the company enjoys, for now.

Google, in fact, reiterates my verbatim, in context, direct quotes of the Google CEO.

Google does not at any time taint the validity of a single word of my direct quotes of the Google CEO’s public comments.

The strongest critique the great Google team is able to muster against my simple recitation of the Google CEO’s public remarks is “misleading.”

If Google labels a straight forward, truthful recounting of publicly made remarks by its CEO as “misleading,” how can we trust its search results to be truthful?

MOREOVER:

If a writer is covertly attacked by Google for directly quoting the Google CEO, how can we trust Google in any endeavor?

Google "rebuts" any and all discussion of its "Google Speak" that any non-Google person may dare to address in non Google-speak fashion, with the “misleading” defense.

Does anyone care to address Google’s prior “misleading” defense approach regarding Sergey’s remarks on Google’s operations in China, made while in Washington DC recently?

PS: This is not the first time that Google has attacked a CNET writer for simply quoting Google created information.

According to the August 5, 2005, CNNMoney.com article, "CNET: We've been blackballed by Google, Tech news site says Google froze out its reporters for publishing Eric Schmidt's personal info":

The CNET story, dated July 14, focused on privacy concerns since Google is amassing such enormous amounts of data about people. It reported that some analysts fear it is becoming a great risk to privacy, because it would be a tempting target for hackers, "zealous government investigators, or even a Google insider who falls short of the company's ethics," the article said.

To underscore its point about how much personal information is available, the CNET report published some personal information about Google's CEO Eric Schmidt -- his salary; his neighborhood, some of his hobbies and political donations -- all obtained through Google searches.

DMM7206GL.jpg

UPDATE: Thank you Google!

UPDATE II: "Court expert on CPC model: 'inherently vulnerable to click fraud'

Newsletters

You have been successfully signed up. To sign up for more newsletters or to manage your account, visit the Newsletter Subscription Center.
See All
See All