Story: Google: An Apology
Posted by: Why would I give you guys my name? (Wednesday 10 August 2005, 9:38 PM)
Oh wow, Cnet really is showing it's true colors. Why doesn't the author of this "Leader" put his/her name to this so-called apology? Is it therefore any surprise Google have taken this action in response to this highly irresponsible article. Why would Google UK have a seperate policy on this no-talk matter? Google is a one-world company. It's a company that takes a stance on ethical behavior. Does cnet take a stance on anythingr. Who knows? We do know that news articles about Google bring CNET lots of traffic, and that means lots of targeted (and expensive) ad inventory. Is CNET truly sorry, or is it just sorry to miss the money.... and bitter? Let the readers decide for themselves. And whoa! CNET wants to criticize the ability and calibre of Google's management!!?? Hahahaha ... [getting up off the floorr] Er, sorry, where did that theory come from? Did they find it searching Google? I wonder what we would find if we started asking probing questions about how well cnet management have managed their company.
Full Talkback thread
Story: Google: An Apology
-
My snarkiness meter's going nuts! espd -
That's not an apology, that's a slap in the face.... Anonymous
-
Sarcasm is the refuge of the weak. Abram Nichols -
Well said. Speaking as a US technology worker wit... Jonathon Doe
-
I really enjoy the conditions that you put on your... Ed Stankiewicz
-
Only the Brits could come up with an apology that... Marc Schlenker
-
"Only the Brits could come up with an apology... chahn
-
While the orginal published article about chief ex... Shockwave
-
Could CNET/ZDnet and Google please show profe... Raoul Teeuwen
-
ahhhhh, The good old days, When the ARAP... itmeens u kntakeajoke -
Oh wow, Cnet really is showing it's true colors. W... Why would I give you guys my name? -
Hahahaha beautiful piece of writing! A fittin... GR
-
Sounds like sour grapes ZDNET... suck it up a... Anonymous
-
Great piece of writing! Felix Ramos
-
Weirdness. If someone snaps a picture of a Google... Anonymous
-
Functionally illiterate... that's what I'm th... GR
-
GR,
Here, Here. Has the rest of the wo... Dave
-
Google:
Slowly, but surely, they drew their plans... Wildey Monkey
-
There is no way Google is going to accept this ins... Kevin Forbes
-
Well said, sarastic and excellent. iyerns
-
You are hereby banned and blacklisted fo... Eric E. Schmidt
-
I hope Google does ban you. There is such a thing... Anonymous
-
Could the author of this article publish his detai... feedback
-
Congratulations - with your unrepentant attitude a... James
-
I don't see how anyone can see the response f... Andrew Davidson
-
Ahhhh...There is nothing quite so refreshing as a... Alan McSwain
-
Nice to see someone actually stand up the the... Anonymous
-
Hey Eric...What's up with the Yahoo email acc... Alan McSwain
-
Its funny how CNET has the nerve to say Google is... marc
-
Sarcastic snobbery aside-- Google is within their... j.m.
-
pathetic...apologize for this? please tell me wha... Anonymous
-
gotta say i lost a little respect for google, they... Anonymous
-
Is it means that Google rule the world? Takács Sándor
-
ZDNet - I thought better of you. Are you not... Anonymous
-
I don't get this.
Google is a publically trad... Anonymous
-
In response to the previous comment....... Anonymous
-
What amuses me are the reponses to ths article att... Dave
-
I am not sure what your organization expects in th... Brad
-
brilliant british beating... mumta
-
Google isn't mad because of the posting of some pe... Gabe da Silveira
-
What the paparazzi does is technically legal... Ben
-
Hmmm, if Google wants you to censor your articles,... Anonymous
-
ROFL
oops!
You guys crawl so pretty :D Anonymous
-
I'm surprised at the number of commenters here who... Anonymous
-
Ah, yes...and here I always thought sarcasm w... Anonymous
-
Its not so much that you shouldn't report concerns... Anonymous
-
Very funny, indeed. Shame on you for accessing pub... Vernon R. Martin
-
I wish the US sister company had the good forsight... Travellar05
-
That's one of the funniest things I've heard in a... Vasco de Sousa
-
My estimation of this sites readership has go... Eric Van Hoolenburger
-
Good for them. CNET and it's sisters deserve a ba... Tony L. Franzese
-
Bravo!!!
Glad to see SOMEONE has the backbone to s... Karim
-
Congratulations! This was an excellent, well writt... Harpalus
-
Google thinks it rules the world. If tomorrow... const change;
-
Oh yeah. Cumshot at google's face. Barrapunto
-
Wasn't Google's motto 'Don't be evil'?
It's going... Don't be Evil
-
Is it surprising that all the rants at this "apolo... kedaha
-
MISSES THE POINT: Google's CEO wasn't angry about... Michael B
-
No, YOU missed the point. The article wasn't... John G
-
Agree with John G.
Also, I think that th... Anonymous
-
Google's "attitude" is clearly shown by the fact t... J. Michael Keating
-
Or, at least, don't use Google to do your searches... Michael Odza
-
1984 bigbrother is here, zdnet should go into more... Dc s
-
classic! great stuff Anonymous
-
VOTE WITH YOUR MOUSE... there are plenty of other... HowardB
-
So many idiots, not enough room to slate them... Queen Liz
-
What??
So the inventors of the atomic bomb are wro... Sam Ud-din
Back to: Google: An Apology
