Got Ethics? Google Rats Lured by TechCrunch Trap
While the blogosphere gleefully saliviates over Google-Facebook smackdown talk, ingnited by Michael Arrington, the real Google-TechCrunch story is a tawdry one, a not so kosher tale of double-crossing exposed on this very day of atonement..
The dutifull and unquestioning blogger pile on for Michael Arrington’s “announcement” of THE Google induced Facebook killer–”Google to Unleash Hell on Social Networks,” for prime example–ignores what is purportedly at the root of the TechCrunch “outing” of Google: SNITCHES, aka GOOGLE RATS.
Arrington happily underscores that his three claimed Google informants of “confidential” and “secret” goings on at the Googleplex pledged non-disclosure to Eric Schmidt and company, before scurrying to the TechCrunch hotline to spill all: No names, please, of course.
What gives?: For three of Google’s supposed “industry luminaries,” and TechCrunch.
Arrington says his tell all Google moles “had to sign confidentiality and non-disclosure agreements strictly forbidding them from discussing what was shown to them at the meeting,” before they discussed all with him!
WHY would such “luminaries” risk undermining their supposedly impending Google working relationships?
IS it really a good thing when a journalist-writer-blogger-editor-publisher-media owner is complicit in the “outing” of a company’s “top-secret” competitive information, at the behest of interested parties?
Got ethics? I often speak to companies about their prospective dealings with Google. When a CEO tells me he is bound by a Google non-disclosure, that enhances my respect for the executive and the company he leads even more.
ALSO:Mint.com: Can Arrington and Calacanis Really Set Web 2.0 Trends? and NO Google Deathblow to Facebook on November 5
PLUS: Facebook Plots Social Network Patent: What Graph? and The Social Graph Circa 2004, in Europe