google bans CNET

[TDF]

take that bitches http://money.cnn.com/2005/08/05/tech...ex.htm?cnn=yes

Google Inc. has blacklisted all CNET reporters for a year, after the popular technology news website published personal information of one of Google's founders in a story about growing privacy concerns for the Internet search engine, according to a CNET statement.


damn..blacklisted through the whole system

[wedouglas]

Ohhhh snap

[wedouglas]

umm cnet is still on google though

[riddler]

umm cnet is still on google though

have to wait for the next dance for it to show..

[leg4]

If they ban CNET from search results... You have the beginning of a POLICE STATE.

[riddler]

If they ban CNET from search results... You have the beginning of a POLICE STATE.

why? if you owned google and someone posted your info on a huge news network you would be pissed too, no matter if its public domain or not its a point..

[baddog]

why? if you owned google and someone posted your info on a huge news network you would be pissed too, no matter if its public domain or not its a point..

If I owned Google I would so manipulate it

[Quickdraw]

I believe they only banned the reporters from talking to Google reps.

[Michael O]

I believe they only banned the reporters from talking to Google reps.

Yeah thats what the story on CNN says.

[mikeyddddd]

They were blackballed.

"CNET on Friday reported "Google representatives have instituted a policy of not talking with CNET News reporters until July 2006 in response to privacy issues raised by a previous story."

They are not banned from listings.

Sheesh! Save the outrage for a real issue.

[High Plains Drifter]

Kind of a misleading title. Google banning anything from their results would be a huge can of worms that they don't want opened.

[leg4]

I agree with Google on this issue, I am not siding with the shitty reporters.

[TexasDreams]

Results as of this minute...

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q...=Google+Search

Results 1 - 10 of about 29,600,000 for cnet. (0.04 seconds)

I wish Google would BAN me in such a way!

[GatorB]

Google is a bunch of hypocites!

Hmmmmmmm let's see

Schmidt is officially Google's chief champion and defender, and has publicly said that there has to be a trade-off between privacy concerns and functionality.

then

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.

then

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Google Inc. has blacklisted all CNET reporters for a year, after the popular technology news website published personal information of one of Google's founders in a story about growing privacy concerns for the Internet search engine, according to a CNET statement.

So what Google is saying is that WE have to sacrifice privacy, not them.

[The Sultan Of Smut]

Google is a bunch of hypocites!

Hmmmmmmm let's see

Schmidt is officially Google's chief champion and defender, and has publicly said that there has to be a trade-off between privacy concerns and functionality.

then

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.

then

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Google Inc. has blacklisted all CNET reporters for a year, after the popular technology news website published personal information of one of Google's founders in a story about growing privacy concerns for the Internet search engine, according to a CNET statement.

So what Google is saying is that WE have to sacrifice privacy, not them.

That's exactly what I was thinking. Shitheads.

[$5 submissions]

If they ban CNET from search results... You have the beginning of a POLICE STATE.

Google is a private (ie., not government-owned) company. They can restrict freedom of speech as much as they want. The US Constitution only protects people from STATE (ie., government) actions.

[baddog]

Google is a private (ie., not government-owned) company. They can restrict freedom of speech as much as they want. The US Constitution only protects people from STATE (ie., government) actions.

You're right . . . now turn on your ICQ please

[High Plains Drifter]

Google is a private (ie., not government-owned) company. They can restrict freedom of speech as much as they want. The US Constitution only protects people from STATE (ie., government) actions.

Maybe I'm giving him too much credit, but I think he's implying that google has so much power over the internet that they're a government-like entity.

[Sparks]

Damn, that's messed up CNET did that.

[Manowar]

Google is a bunch of hypocites!

Hmmmmmmm let's see

Schmidt is officially Google's chief champion and defender, and has publicly said that there has to be a trade-off between privacy concerns and functionality.

then

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.

then

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Google Inc. has blacklisted all CNET reporters for a year, after the popular technology news website published personal information of one of Google's founders in a story about growing privacy concerns for the Internet search engine, according to a CNET statement.

So what Google is saying is that WE have to sacrifice privacy, not them.

so true

[Wiggles]

fuck Cnet is going to lose alot of money from this.

[Trax]

thats typical for gfy
fuckers are too stupid to read lol

[XxXotic]

If I owned Google I would so manipulate it

if you owned google you'd have more money then you could imagine spending, why waste your time manipulating SERPS to make what in comparison would be a piss boy's wages to what you're already get....

[mardigras]

Damn, that's messed up CNET did that.

Would be messed up if CNET had published private information gained from a private source, not a Google search

[mardigras]

So what Google is saying is that WE have to sacrifice privacy, not them.

Pretty much what it sounds like to me

[xclusive]

Results as of this minute...

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q...=Google+Search

Results 1 - 10 of about 29,600,000 for cnet. (0.04 seconds)

I wish Google would BAN me in such a way!

looks like they did

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q...=Google+Search


Results 1 - 10 of about 2,130 for TexasDreams. (0.26 seconds)

[messiah1]

Google is a private (ie., not government-owned) company. They can restrict freedom of speech as much as they want. The US Constitution only protects people from STATE (ie., government) actions.

That is our future - slaves of the corporation, some are already living it. Thanks for the reminder .

[pr0]

why? if you owned google and someone posted your info on a huge news network you would be pissed too, no matter if its public domain or not its a point..

Yea denny's tried banning all black people for a bit, it didn't work out too well.

[Shoehorn!]

So what Google is saying is that WE have to sacrifice privacy, not them.

Are you surprised?

[Shoehorn!]

Yea denny's tried banning all black people for a bit, it didn't work out too well.

[wedouglas]

Yea denny's tried banning all black people for a bit, it didn't work out too well.

haha... not to shabby

[Furious_Male]

People still aren't reading the entire thread or story.

Oh well. I agree with what GatorB said (http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showpo...&postcount=14). Seems they are getting a taste of there own medicine. Its part of the business they should get back to work they need to keep the stock high and find those 2 chefs.

[tony286]

I spoke to Eric when I was a headhunter, very nice guy.

[The Ghost]

if you owned google you'd have more money then you could imagine spending, why waste your time manipulating SERPS to make what in comparison would be a piss boy's wages to what you're already get....

I was thinkin' the same thing.