  LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5
3 edits |  No law says you have to talk to reporters
My Web Page
Join Red Room Forum | |
|
 | | | Re: No law says you have to talk to reporters good point. some reporters just dont know when to stop, its getting out of hand.
google has every right to not talk to who ever they want. | |
|
| | | | Re: No law says you have to talk to reporters Nobody says Google doesn't have that right. Old Repub puts that up as a straw man to knock down.
It is however, stupid. Particularly when all CNET did was use Google to obtain information on Google. | |
|
| | |  ronpinImagine Reality
join:2002-12-06
Nirvana | Re: No law says you have to talk to reporters Earlier this year, he pulled in almost $90 million from sales of Google stock and made at least another $50 million selling shares in the past two months as the stock leaped to more than $300 a share. ...
Most people can't see the fraud here -- it's too obvious to see as fraud. Do you see the legal theft?
Big-Money props-up a "made for TV" company with phantom profits, goes public, and then sucks-up to some real Investment Fund managers to dump money into it -- which inflates the stock prices -- and the insiders cash-in. By the time it crashes -- and your grandmother's 401K disappears (so you or your tax dollars get to care for her) -- the CEO's are living large while laughing at all the "stupid money out there". No wonder the CEO is mad at the exposure.
--
When Clinton lied -- no one died. | |
|
| | | |  calvoiper
join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA | Re: No law says you have to talk to reporters I doubt that Google and Schmidt are angry at the disclosure of the financial transactions--given SEC reporting regs, this stuff is very public, and I've read several articles in other publications outlining which Googlers have cashed in how much.
Rather, I suspect they are angry over the article's consistent characterization of Google as some sort of evil data accumulator. It's as though someone wrote an article about a skeet shooting club focusing on how many people its members could kill at a holiday parade if they took all of the club's shotguns, bought all of the ammo in all of the gun shops within 50 miles, and then carefully planned the maximum mayhem possible. Such an article would, of course, include inflammatory quotes from "well respected" anti-gun advocates--just like CNET's quotes from "privacy experts."
CNET's article is clearly protected speech, but reporters shouldn't be surprised that if they write speculation about how horrible someone else might act, that someone else might not like to talk to them for a while....
calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies! | |
|
| | | |  cdigioiaPremium
join:2005-06-08
korea, repub | That's only a concern if Grandma invested all of her 401k money in Google stock without any diversification, which would be insane. The only way Google could be responsible for that is if Grandma works for Google, and they (if they were assholes) heavily encouraged her to invest all her 401k in Google. | |
|
| | | | | calvoiper
join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA | Re: No law says you have to talk to reporters said by cdigioia:....The only way Google could be responsible for that is if Grandma works for Google, and they (if they were assholes) heavily encouraged her to invest all her 401k in Google. Ah, yes--like WorldCom did....
calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies! | |
|
| | | | | | cdigioiaPremium
join:2005-06-08
korea, repub | Re: No law says you have to talk to reporters Si, bastards taking advantage of ignorance | |
|
| |  nixenRockin' the BoxenPremium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA | said by shane349:good point. some reporters just dont know when to stop, its getting out of hand. Yeah. We really should repeal the 1st Ammendment. The libel laws just haven't proven strong enough to reign those pesky reporters in.
-tom
--
"Some people have morals, standards and ideals about quality, but I'm an American: I couldn't care less." --Tony Pierce (paraphrased) | |
|
| | | | Whenever the media gets a hold of a story, they run with it. They have no regard for the consequences or even the accuracy. I wish they would apply common sense to all of their stories, even one the ones that boost their ratings. If they had, this never would have happened. | |
|
| johnbor
join:2004-03-30
Chagrin Falls, OH | What personal information did they show, the stocks and money or was there more? where else lived , what? | |
|
| |  DrewCapuGiant Diehard
join:2001-12-19
California | Re: No law says you have to talk to reporters Um, try googling for it  | |
|
| | | johnbor
join:2004-03-30
Chagrin Falls, OH |  Re: No law says you have to talk to reporters
 | |
|
|  kapilThe Kapil
join:2000-04-26
Chicago, IL | There are good and bad people in every line of work. From people who flip burgers all the way to the leader of the free world. Free press, first amendment and the right of a journalist to continue seeking the information after the primary source doesn't want to co-operate have absolutely nothing to do with ethics.
...and if we're going to start policing the "ethics" of reporters, let's shut down Geraldo and Fox News before we get to CNet, shall we?
--
Stand Up For Free Speech! - »www.eff.org | |
|
| | LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | Re: No law says you have to talk to reporters said by kapil:...and if we're going to start policing the "ethics" of reporters, let's shut down Geraldo and Fox News before we get to CNet, shall we? I agree on Geraldo.:p
--
My Web Page
Join Red Room Forum | |
|
| |  tapeloopNot bad at all, really.Premium
join:2004-06-27
Airstrip One
kudos:1 | said by kapil:...and if we're going to start policing the "ethics" of reporters, let's shut down Geraldo and Fox News before we get to CNet, shall we? You forgot Bob "BullShi--" Novak. (his words, not mine )
--
Copyright infringement is illegal. Murder is illegal. Therefore, file sharing is murder. | |
|
|  JoeyDeePremium
join:2004-07-23
Las Vegas, NV | said by Linklist:...trashing Google on a regular basis - deserved or not. There are no ethics in the reporters so-called profession. Did you read CNet's article. If I were to look for a word to describe it "benign" comes to mind. It was gentle treatment of what some consider a big problem. Using Google's CEO as an example of what's available was pretty good reporting, IMHO. Whether or not you are concerned about the privacy issues, don't you think the Google guy is being just a little elitist here? | |
|
| | LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | Re: No law says you have to talk to reporters said by JoeyDee:Did you read CNet's article. If I were to look for a word to describe it "benign" comes to mind. It was gentle treatment of what some consider a big problem. Using Google's CEO as an example of what's available was pretty good reporting, IMHO. Whether or not you are concerned about the privacy issues, don't you think the Google guy is being just a little elitist here? I agree that Google CEO is not being smart. And I didn't find anything particularly bad in the article. But after Google did stop access, I also am pretty sure that Google will get hatchet jobbed from now on at CNET. That is the way reporters and their editors do business. If you have the gall to shut them out, the vendetta will be launched.
--
My Web Page
Join Red Room Forum | |
|
| | | tapeloopNot bad at all, really.Premium
join:2004-06-27
Airstrip One
kudos:1 | Re: No law says you have to talk to reporters said by Linklist:said by JoeyDee:Did you read CNet's article. If I were to look for a word to describe it "benign" comes to mind. It was gentle treatment of what some consider a big problem. Using Google's CEO as an example of what's available was pretty good reporting, IMHO. Whether or not you are concerned about the privacy issues, don't you think the Google guy is being just a little elitist here? I agree that Google CEO is not being smart. And I didn't find anything particularly bad in the article. But after Google did stop access, I also am pretty sure that Google will get hatchet jobbed from now on at CNET. That is the way reporters and their editors do business. If you have the gall to shut them out, the vendetta will be launched. hm...minister was right about that "straw man" argument.
--
Copyright infringement is illegal. Murder is illegal. Therefore, file sharing is murder. | |
|
| | | | LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | Re: No law says you have to talk to reporters said by tapeloop:said by Linklist:said by JoeyDee:Did you read CNet's article. If I were to look for a word to describe it "benign" comes to mind. It was gentle treatment of what some consider a big problem. Using Google's CEO as an example of what's available was pretty good reporting, IMHO. Whether or not you are concerned about the privacy issues, don't you think the Google guy is being just a little elitist here? I agree that Google CEO is not being smart. And I didn't find anything particularly bad in the article. But after Google did stop access, I also am pretty sure that Google will get hatchet jobbed from now on at CNET. That is the way reporters and their editors do business. If you have the gall to shut them out, the vendetta will be launched. hm...minister was right about that "straw man" argument. Is it a straw man argument? There is a reason that these quotes were made:
»www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quote···280.html
Never pick a fight with people who buy ink by the barrel.
William J. Clinton »www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quote···088.htmlMy pappy told me never to bet my bladder against a brewery or get into an argument with people who buy ink by the barrel.
Lane Kirkland
--
My Web Page
Join Red Room Forum | |
|
| | | | | tapeloopNot bad at all, really.Premium
join:2004-06-27
Airstrip One
kudos:1 | Re: No law says you have to talk to reporters Still a straw man. What you're doing now is like pulling out the Shakespeare quote "kill all the lawyers" to argue in favor of tort reform.
Your argument went south when you used the blanket statement of reporters being "petty" to justify Google's actions, whatever they may be.
--
Copyright infringement is illegal. Murder is illegal. Therefore, file sharing is murder. | |
|
|  herb77
join:2005-02-23
Fort Myers, FL | This is why I don't use google any more. I have no trust in them any more. | |
|
| | calvoiper
join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA | Re: No law says you have to talk to reporters said by herb77:This is why I don't use google any more. I have no trust in them any more. And what have they done to breach your former trust?
All I've seen so far is sheer speculation that there might be some horrible use of their data. When I see some evidence of abuse, then my trust will start to falter.
calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies! | |
|
| | | herb77
join:2005-02-23
Fort Myers, FL | Re: No law says you have to talk to reporters So you're going to wait until they F you over first? | |
|
| | | | calvoiper
join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA | Re: No law says you have to talk to reporters Not really. It's more like I'm not paranoid about who knows that I searched for Asian restaurants in Denver last night....
calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies! | |
|
 Jim GurdPremium
join:2000-07-08
Plymouth, MI | Privacy I'm not worried about Google invading my privacy. I only use it as a search engine and don't accept cookies. | |
|
|  OreoleOWanna Settle This Outside??
join:2004-05-22
Feasterville Trevose, PA | Re: Privacy Did you read the article at all? LMFAO | |
|
| | |
| | | Jim GurdPremium
join:2000-07-08
Plymouth, MI | Re: Privacy Hey jackass, I did read the article. My point is that I don't use any of the services that require giving them personal information. No G-Mail, no cookies, no desktop search, no web accelerator and no toolbar. I have never signed up for anything with them where I gave them my name, address or e-mail address.
If you are talking about public documents being listed in Google then they aren't doing anything different from any other search engine. | |
|
| | | | | | Re: Privacy Perhaps you should read the article again. | |
|
 qdemn7Smurf in My LoopPremium
join:2003-09-16
Fort Worth, TX | Google doth protest too much Methinks Google (actually Sergey Brin) doth protest too much:
6. You can make money without doing evil. »www.google.com/corporate/tenthings.html
""I think the mantra of not being evil is not disingenuous, but it is a hard credo to stick to when you're a public corporation with stockholders to please and economic incentives driving you to collect as much information as possible," Bankston said. "I'm not saying it's evil to collect this information; I'm saying it's dangerous for them to collect this."
"Quis cusotdiet ipsos custodes."
--
"If a man says something out in the woods, and no woman is around to hear him, is he still wrong?" | |
|
|
See 7 replies to this post |
|
3 edits | CNET Sucks Ass!! Do you really think Google cares about a advertisement whore like CNET!
This was the first article from CNET i read since 2000... They suck and I dont give a damn about their articles. If i want to know what is going on in the tech world I use DSLREPORts or Slashdot!!
--
SKYFREEDOM
NETWORKS
Whatever the angle; We've got you covered. | |
|
| kapilThe Kapil
join:2000-04-26
Chicago, IL | Re: CNET Sucks Ass!! Slashdot, much like this site, doesn't do much original reporting. They gather news from other sources and post them for comments by the likes of us who really should be working but are surfing the net on the company's time instead 
CNet has its share of issues, but IMHO it is one of the better sites for technical news.
--
Stand Up For Free Speech! - »www.eff.org | |
|
| | | | Re: CNET Sucks Ass!! You are definatly right. This site is my first morning cup o news.
But I think this site is totally different arena, much better arena, when it comes to news. The format and content of this website is above par and thats why i have a Premium account here.
--
SKYFREEDOM NETWORKS
Whatever the angle; We've got you covered. | |
|
| Primis1
join:2005-06-13
Coldwater, MI | quote:
Do you really think Google cares about a advertisement whore like CNET!
This was the first article from CNET i read since 2000... They suck and I dont give a damn about their articles. If i want to know what is going on in the tech world I use Slashdot!!
Yes, because we all know Slashdot is a true bastion of incomparable, unbiased journalistic integrity.
No wonder people are stupid and uninformed nowadays. | |
|
| |
1 edit | Re: CNET Sucks Ass!!said by Primis1:No wonder people are stupid and uninformed nowadays. So people are stupid and you are the all knowing! This clearly shows your arrogance towards your own problem...
Dont go around saying everyone is stupid for not agreeing with you.
--
SKYFREEDOM
NETWORKS
Whatever the angle; We've got you covered. | |
|
| |
| |  Where's Tylor Durden when you need him?
| |
|
| | Power IMO, power corrupts. And nowadays information is power. Sooner or later the power that Google has will be misused or abused. This "bark" at CNET is a good example: if you're a start-up you're happy if CNET writes an article about you, when you became a huge behemoth and your name's used as a verb by millions of people you can spit on CNET.
Of course, there might be another story, behind the story, who knows...
just my $0.02
AK | |
|
| calvoiper
join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA | Re: Power You may be right, but I'd say that power has already corrupted the media. The real motive here may be that CNET and other media see their power slipping away to more personal informations sources like Google.
What I see is a reporter whining "Hey, it's MY job to uncover secrets and publish them. If you make it easy for people to do this on an individual basis, I won't be able to decide whose secrets to invade or to control the information flow anymore...."
calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies! | |
|
| | I hope this means That I won't see so many damn Google stories on C|Net. I use about ten sites to get my tech news, C|Net being one of them. For some reason C|Net feels the need to post when a Google employee farts. Was C|Net over reporting on Google and Google got tired of all the free press. This realy a case of biting the hand that feeds you. | |
|
| BPremium,MVM
join:2000-10-28 | Re: I hope this means
Wait; which Google employee farted??
-- B
--
In a realm outside causality and function | |
|
| | | | Re: I hope this means Heh | |
|
| | Republocrats...said by Minister:
Nobody says Google doesn't have that right. Old Repub puts that up as a straw man to knock down.
Stupid political comment alert. | |
|
| | Boo Hoo Google Once google went public it when it began to change, it now has to make more and more money to appeal to shareholders, and they need to advance into more and more areas quickly. They make a ton of cash but will need more revenue sources to appeal to investors in the future. | |
|
| | copyright permission I thought google and cnet had copyright permission to post anything about each other? | |
|
|
|
