Google and CNet: An Uneasy, Embarassing Standoff

A little background first. Last week, a CNet reporter apparently used Google to dig up some semi-personal information on Eric Schmidt, the CEO of Google. Google didn't like this and reportedly placed a one year ban on speaking to anyone from CNet.

This is generating a LOT of talk; even Forbes has joined in. Search Engine Journal reports:

"CNET News.com columnist Elinor Mills googled Google CEO Eric Schmidt last month to find out Eric’s net worth, the town he lives in, how much Google stock he sold, and his favorite presidential candidate and wrote about it. All of the info was available over Google and now apparently Google has issued a gag order to its employees not to speak with CNET for one year. “Google representatives have instituted a policy of not talking with News.com reporters until July 2006 in response to privacy issues raised by a previous story.”

There's a lot of irony in this whole thing; mostly that the information is out there because Google made it accessible. Anybody could have found it, if they were really inclined to do so. Heck, I googled the man myself and found that his old webpage has listed a Yahoo email addy; not the most promising of votes for his new employer. I appreciate what the unofficial Google Weblog has to say about all this brouhaha:

" Google’s banning action is not only deeply ironic, it is petty and hypocritical. Though it has been requested, Google cannot issue a comment on this mess; there is nothing redeeming to say about it. Google must simmer silently in shame as observers gasp in disbelief that the company could be so tone-deaf to PR repercussions. But Google could correct the matter, and it’s amazing to me that somebody didn’t step out from on high and issue a quick, resolving statement along these lines: “We regret the confusion; obviously it is not Google’s policy to punish media outlets for covering our products and demonstrating their power. We appreciate CNET’s fine coverage of Google through the years. Furthermore, we are aware of, and deeply concerned with, privacy issues every day here at Google.” Appointing a privacy officer wouldn’t hurt, even as a gesture."

Couldn't agree more. Things like this don't just "go away"; they just get bigger as more and more people talk, speculate, and churn the old rumor mill. Google needs to be the bigger search engine here, in every sense of the word.

Related:

Here's Mill's infamous CNet article, and you can also learn more about search engines with Search Engines and Directories from A to Z.