<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Google and Orwell? Come on, people</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/02/06/google-and-orwell-come-on-people/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/02/06/google-and-orwell-come-on-people/</link>
	<description>... at the intersection of media, technology, business and the web</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 23:19:42 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: House Insurance</title>
		<link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/02/06/google-and-orwell-come-on-people/#comment-210564</link>
		<dc:creator>House Insurance</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Jan 2007 07:31:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mathewingram.com/work/index.php/2006/02/06/google-and-orwell-come-on-people/#comment-210564</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;House Insurance...&lt;/strong&gt;

stupor?investigators,attracts heedlessly House Insurance [url=http://www.onhouseinsurance.com/#]House Insurance[/url] http://www.onhouseinsurance.com/# ...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>House Insurance&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>stupor?investigators,attracts heedlessly House Insurance [url=http://www.onhouseinsurance.com/#]House Insurance[/url] <a href="http://www.onhouseinsurance.com/#" rel="nofollow">http://www.onhouseinsurance.com/#</a> &#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan Williamson</title>
		<link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/02/06/google-and-orwell-come-on-people/#comment-323</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Williamson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2006 15:29:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mathewingram.com/work/index.php/2006/02/06/google-and-orwell-come-on-people/#comment-323</guid>
		<description>BMW's marketing / pr dept must be jumping for joy - they've pretty much received global publicity for their used car operations, a division which (in my opinion) has relatively little visibility. All for free.

Wonder if anyone else will try to get 'banned' from Google?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>BMW&#8217;s marketing / pr dept must be jumping for joy - they&#8217;ve pretty much received global publicity for their used car operations, a division which (in my opinion) has relatively little visibility. All for free.</p>
<p>Wonder if anyone else will try to get &#8216;banned&#8217; from Google?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mathew</title>
		<link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/02/06/google-and-orwell-come-on-people/#comment-322</link>
		<dc:creator>Mathew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2006 12:28:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mathewingram.com/work/index.php/2006/02/06/google-and-orwell-come-on-people/#comment-322</guid>
		<description>Scott:

Thanks for the response.  I would agree that the high-handed and
somewhat self-righteous attitude Google has shown towards BMW is
worthy of criticism, and they could probably have handled it better.
And your point about Animal Farm is well taken.

But I still think seeing dark portents in what Google has done is
overdoing it just a tad.  After all, Google doesn't even have 50 per
cent of the search market -- excluding a single site is hardly a death
sentence.

If you had used the Orwell reference after Google's China decision, I
might have actually agreed with you there.  I think the slippery slope
is a lot steeper when it comes to that kind of thing, and the
potential "evil" much greater.

Anyway, glad to have your input as always.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Scott:</p>
<p>Thanks for the response.  I would agree that the high-handed and<br />
somewhat self-righteous attitude Google has shown towards BMW is<br />
worthy of criticism, and they could probably have handled it better.<br />
And your point about Animal Farm is well taken.</p>
<p>But I still think seeing dark portents in what Google has done is<br />
overdoing it just a tad.  After all, Google doesn&#8217;t even have 50 per<br />
cent of the search market &#8212; excluding a single site is hardly a death<br />
sentence.</p>
<p>If you had used the Orwell reference after Google&#8217;s China decision, I<br />
might have actually agreed with you there.  I think the slippery slope<br />
is a lot steeper when it comes to that kind of thing, and the<br />
potential &#8220;evil&#8221; much greater.</p>
<p>Anyway, glad to have your input as always.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Slava  Sakhnenko</title>
		<link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/02/06/google-and-orwell-come-on-people/#comment-321</link>
		<dc:creator>Slava  Sakhnenko</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2006 06:47:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mathewingram.com/work/index.php/2006/02/06/google-and-orwell-come-on-people/#comment-321</guid>
		<description>Hehe, clearly Karp is trying to game memeorandum with these childish hysterics... either that or he's a total nut if the fact that Google is blocking the kind of sites that ruin search results for all of us is "keeping him awake at night"

Scott, &lt;em&gt;don't let the bedbugs bite&lt;/em&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hehe, clearly Karp is trying to game memeorandum with these childish hysterics&#8230; either that or he&#8217;s a total nut if the fact that Google is blocking the kind of sites that ruin search results for all of us is &#8220;keeping him awake at night&#8221;</p>
<p>Scott, <em>don&#8217;t let the bedbugs bite</em>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott Karp</title>
		<link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/02/06/google-and-orwell-come-on-people/#comment-320</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott Karp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2006 05:09:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mathewingram.com/work/index.php/2006/02/06/google-and-orwell-come-on-people/#comment-320</guid>
		<description>Mathew, if this is such a "ridiculous" issue, then why are you posting about it? And why did Danny Sullivan post a 6-point "apology" for Google on my site? 

It would indeed be inflammatory to suggest that Google is "totally corrupt" -- clearly, it's not, and I didn't say that -- I was "wondering," not declaring. Yes, Google doesn't have "total" power over search, but they do have total power over all the traffic they do control.

When I say that Google appears to be behaving in an Orwellian fashion, it is judgment about their tone, not about fairness, morality, or legality -- at least not yet.

I can only hope you are right in your separating Google's actions from "something really meaningful." 

Orwell's lesson (I'm thinking here of Animal Farm, not 1984) is that the slippery slope doesn't begin with "a boot stamping on a human face." Each step in the descent can be written off as benign.

If you can sleep well on this, then sweet dreams. But it's still keeping me awake at night.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mathew, if this is such a &#8220;ridiculous&#8221; issue, then why are you posting about it? And why did Danny Sullivan post a 6-point &#8220;apology&#8221; for Google on my site? </p>
<p>It would indeed be inflammatory to suggest that Google is &#8220;totally corrupt&#8221; &#8212; clearly, it&#8217;s not, and I didn&#8217;t say that &#8212; I was &#8220;wondering,&#8221; not declaring. Yes, Google doesn&#8217;t have &#8220;total&#8221; power over search, but they do have total power over all the traffic they do control.</p>
<p>When I say that Google appears to be behaving in an Orwellian fashion, it is judgment about their tone, not about fairness, morality, or legality &#8212; at least not yet.</p>
<p>I can only hope you are right in your separating Google&#8217;s actions from &#8220;something really meaningful.&#8221; </p>
<p>Orwell&#8217;s lesson (I&#8217;m thinking here of Animal Farm, not 1984) is that the slippery slope doesn&#8217;t begin with &#8220;a boot stamping on a human face.&#8221; Each step in the descent can be written off as benign.</p>
<p>If you can sleep well on this, then sweet dreams. But it&#8217;s still keeping me awake at night.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
